an annotated bibliography of current methods for law teaching

*. Arturo López Torres is a Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Library andComputing at Texas Tech University. He was the former Director of the Law Library andComputing at Gonzaga University. Mary Kay Lundwall is a Professor of Law at FloridaCoastal School of Law.

1

Moving Beyond Langdell II:An Annotated Bibliography of

Current Methods for Law Teaching

Arturo López Torres and Mary Kay Lundwall*

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2A. Selection and Exclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3B. Organization and Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4C. Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

SUBJECTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5ADMINISTRATIVE LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION/MEDIATION . . . . . . . 5ANTITRUST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7AUDIOVISUAL AIDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8BANKRUPTCY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8CASE METHOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9CASE STUDIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10CASEBOOKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10CIVIL PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12CLINICAL EDUCATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12COMMERCIAL PAPER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15COMPUTERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15CONSTITUTIONAL LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17CONTRACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17CORPORATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20CRITICAL LEGAL STUDIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21DIVERSITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22EMPLOYMENT LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23ENVIRONMENTAL LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23ETHICS/PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

2 GONZAGA LAW REVIEW

1. See Arturo L. Torres and Karen Harwood, Moving Beyond Langdell: An AnnotatedBibliography of Current Methods for Law Teaching, 1994 GONZ. L. REV. 1 (spec. ed.).

2. See Arturo López Torres, MacCrate Goes to Law School: An Annotated

EVALUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27EVIDENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28EXTERNSHIPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29FAMILY LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30FEMINIST LEGAL THEORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30GENDER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31HEALTH LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33INTERNATIONAL LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33JURISPRUDENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34LEARNING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35LEGAL ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36LEGAL RESEARCH AND WRITING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37LEGISLATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42PROBLEM METHOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42PROBLEM SOLVING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42PROPERTY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44RACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45SIMULATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45SKILLS TRAINING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47SMALL GROUPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49STORYTELLING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49TAXATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50TEACHING METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50TORTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54WILLS AND TRUSTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

INDEX OF AUTHORS’ NAMES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

INTRODUCTION

In 1994, Gonzaga Institute for Law Teaching and the Gonzaga LawReview co-sponsored a bibliography1 that annotated articles on teachingmethods used in law schools. The bibliography covered articles publishedbetween 1985 and the first half of 1993. This bibliography continues theprocess of reporting articles that offer practical suggestions on pedagogy. Itdoes not duplicate any of the annotations previously reported and covers a fiveand-a-half year period, from June 1993 to December 1999. Similarly, thisbibliography does not replicate the annotations found in a related bibliography2

2000 BIBLIOGRAPHY 3

Bibliography for Teaching Lawyering Skills in the Classroom, 77 NEB. L. REV. 132 (1998).3. This was the subject of yet another bibliography. See Arturo López Torres & W.

Clinton Sterling, Will Law Schools Go the Distance? An Annotated Bibliography on DistanceEducation in Law, 91 L. LIBR. J. 655 (1999).

4. Unlike in the United States and Canada, law degrees in Australia, New Zealand,and the United Kingdom are undergraduate degrees. However, articles emanating from thesecountries that otherwise meet the selection criteria are included.

reporting on methods for teaching lawyering skills in the traditional classroom,even though most, if not all, of its 204 entries would be relevant to the presentbibliography. Also, the nascent body of articles on teaching law by means ofdistance education is included elsewhere3. Although the majority of articlescited are from United States legal publications, unlike the previousbibliography, we also made a concerted effort to include relevant articles fromCanada, Australia, the United Kingdom, and New Zealand since 1990.

While this bibliography is extensive, it cannot be consideredcomprehensive. Many fine articles were omitted because they were moretheoretical than practical, and hence outside the scope of our inquiry.Additionally, while every effort was made to produce a comprehensivebibliography, it is possible that we may have missed some excellent articles. Ifyou know of articles we have missed, please send us a citation so we mayevaluate it for possible inclusion in a future supplement. The bibliography iscurrent as of December 1999. We modified the citation format from the stylesuggested in A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF CITATIONS (16th edition) to include theauthor’s full name, unabbreviated journal title, and page length of the article.

A. Selection and Exclusion

The 209 articles selected for this bibliography must, in some way, considerteaching methodologies in a classroom or similar setting. The methodologiesmust be discussed from a pedagogical perspective. Thus, articles that explainhow a teacher approaches a particular course or situation and describes thematerials chosen, methods employed, exercises used, and evaluationinstruments or methods utilized would definitely be included, while a theoreticaltreatment of the value of a course or methodology might be excluded. In allcases we asked ourselves if the proposed article would offer insights that wouldhelp classroom teachers develop new teaching methods. Essentially, classroomteachers and clinicians are our intended audience.

Excluded are articles discussing general or broad educational objectives,theoretical implications, curricular reforms, items that do not directly describespecific pedagogical examples or experiences, or articles describing teachinglaw from an undergraduate perspective in the United States4. Even withinprofessional legal materials, we did not include materials from monographs,


such as Gerry Hess’ and Steven Friedland’s book, TECHNIQUES FOR TEACHINGLAW (1999), newsletters like the LAW TEACHER (Gonzaga University, Institutefor Law School Teaching), or materials from workshops, CLE or professionalmeetings, such as the American Association of Law School (AALS) annualconferences.

B. Organization and Classification

The entries in this bibliography are classified according to teachingmethods or teaching subjects explicitly stated in or implicitly gleaned from thearticle. The articles are arranged alphabetically within each category by author.If an article did not fit into any of the defined categories, it was placed under“Teaching Methods.” When articles address two or more teaching methods, thecitation is cross-referenced in each of the categories. As with the previousbibliography, the annotations note any unique features conveyed by the article,such as course descriptions, course materials, syllabi, class assignments, orexercises. There is a separate index of authors’ names at the end of thebibliography.

C. Methodology

We wanted to include pieces that were readily available and accessible.Thus, the materials consulted for this bibliography are sources that are typicallyfound in most United States law school libraries. For example, the sourceschecked included: INDEX TO LEGAL PERIODICALS, Legal Resource Index(electronic equivalent to CURRENT LAW INDEX); LegalTrac, Westlaw (JLR, theJournal and Law Review database); Lexis (ALLREV, the combined Lawreview file); and INDEX TO CANADIAN LEGAL LITERATURE. In addition,selective journals were reviewed from 1990 to date in toto, including: CLINICALLAW REVIEW; JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION (reviewed from 1994 to date);JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGAL EDUCATION; LAW TEACHER: JOURNAL OFTHE ASSOCIATION OF LAW TEACHERS; LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW; LEGALSTUDIES: THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF PUBLIC TEACHERS OF LAW;SCRIBES: JOURNAL OF LEGAL WRITING; and LEGAL WRITING: THE JOURNALOF THE LEGAL WRITING INSTITUTE.

The initial bibliographic searches turned up several thousand items. Thereferences were then reviewed and identified for relevancy. The results turnedup several hundred articles, which were then retrieved and reviewed to ascertainwhether they contained the necessary criteria for inclusion. Additionally, thearticles cited, referenced, or discussed in these pieces were also evaluated forpossible inclusion. The results are 209 individual entries reported in thisbibliography.

2000 BIBLIOGRAPHY 5

SUBJECTS

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Migdal, Stephen & Martin Cartwright, Student Based Learning – APolytechnic’s Experience, 25 LAW TEACHER 120-131 (1991). The authorsbriefly describe their trial and error attempts and subsequent mastery of aself-learning system, where in an Administrative Law course students learn attheir own pace with minimal traditional classroom contact. They claim thecourse improves legal research abilities and can be easily converted to adistance education setting. The methods are described and the course outlineand workplan are supplied in the Appendices.

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION/MEDIATION

Alexander, Peter C., Peter N. Kutulakis & Robert M. Ackerman, IntegratingAlternative Dispute Resolution into the Bankruptcy Curriculum, 102DICKINSON LAW REVIEW 259-275 (1998). The authors describe a two-classADR exercise incorporated into a Debtor-Creditor course. The authors provideall the materials used for this simulation including fact sheets for the variousparties, financial data, and pleadings.

Astor, Hilary & Christine Chinkin, Teaching Dispute Resolution: A Reflectionand Analysis, 2 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 1-33 (1990). This article describesand reflects upon the authors’ Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) course atSydney Law School (Australia). Among the components covered are courseobjectives, course content, dispute resolution content, methods for skillsdevelopment, teaching methods, and methods for assessing studentperformance. The skills development section provides thorough descriptions ofvarious dispute resolution and mediation exercises used in tandem with classlectures and discussions.

Buckley, Ross P., Incorporating Dispute Resolution and Drafting Skills Intoa Substantive Law Course, 16 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGAL EDUCATION261-269 (1998). This article describes how to integrate alternative disputeresolution and drafting skills in a contracts course at Bonds University(Australian). Two modules for teaching dispute resolution skills, includingdrafting skills are presented.

Calver, Richard, The Teaching of Commercial Alternative Dispute Resolution:Problems and Opportunities, 12 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGALEDUCATION 113-133 (1994). After briefly outlining his personal motivation for


wanting to teach the Commercial Alternative Dispute Resolution course, Calverproceeds to set out the course aim and objectives, course content, andassessment methods. The Appendix contains the class outline and reading list.

Campbell, Beth, Professional Legal Education, Deep Learning and DisputeResolution, 15 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGAL EDUCATION 1-14 (1997).Arguing that dispute resolution is an integral component of legal education,Campbell posits “. . . there are significant affinities between the approaches tosocial and economic problem-solving exemplified in mediation theory and thoseadvocated by the proponents of deep learning as a style of education whichencourages imaginative understanding of the problems encountered by actualpeople in real life situations.” (p. 1) Problems in teaching dispute resolution tolarge classes are briefly discussed and a sample class exercise is provided in theAppendix.

Chinkin, C.M. & Romana Sandurska, Learning About International LawThrough Dispute Resolution, 40 INTERNATIONAL & COMPARATIVE LAWQUARTERLY 529-550 (1991). Drawing upon the experience of developing andteaching an International Dispute Resolution course to final-year law studentsat Sydney University (Australia), the authors discuss their methodology ofteaching and research for the course. They conclude dispute resolution canprovide a different perspective for the formation and operation of substantivelegal rules.

Kovach, Kimberlee K., The Lawyer as Teacher: The Role of Education inLawyering, 4 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 359-390 (1998). “This paper exploreshow teaching and lawyering resemble one another and looks specifically at therole of the lawyer as one of an educator.” (p. 361) Assuming the validity of thispremise, the author describes and recounts her experience with clinicalclassroom and extracurricular activities that allow students to be teachers aswell as evaluators of teaching effectiveness by their peers.

Landry, Elaine M. & Anne Donnellon, Teaching Negotiation with a FeministPerspective, 15 NEGOTIATION JOURNAL 21-29 (1999). This article outlinessome of the issues associated with the traditional method of teaching negotiationand illustrates how feminist pedagogical principles may be incorporated into thecourse.

O’Neill, Kate, Adding an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Perspectiveto a Traditional Legal Writing Course, 50 FLORIDA LAW REVIEW 709-718(1998). O’Neill briefly explains how she incorporated Alternative Dispute

2000 BIBLIOGRAPHY 7

Resolution components into a traditional first-year legal research and writingcourse.

Spegel, Nadja, Lawyers Learning to Survive: The Application ofAdventure-Based Learning to Skills Development, 14 JOURNAL OFPROFESSIONAL LEGAL EDUCATION 25-50 (1996). Adventure-based learning(ABL) relies on reflection and debriefing to help students create “meaning outof the experience in order to apply their learning to the next activity and a newenvironment.” (p. 26) The author reports on the University of Queensland’s“Adventure Project,” which was designed to incorporate ABL in disputeresolution skills, such as communication, lateral thinking, problem solving,negotiation and mediation. The Appendix outlines four ABL exercises.

Weinstein, Janet, Teaching Mediation in Law Schools: Training Lawyers tobe Wise, 35 NEW YORK LAW SCHOOL LAW REVIEW 199-238 (1990). Theauthor describes the theory and planning that went into creating a clinicalmediation course. She describes the course’s goals, strategies, some classactivities and evaluation of her program.

ANTITRUST

Orland, Leonard, Teaching Antitrust During Microsoft, 31 CONNECTICUTLAW REVIEW 1375-1385 (1999). A seminar taught by the author addressing theMicrosoft antitrust case is discussed. Materials used and class progression arebriefly discussed. One should also consult the author’s previous piece,Commentary. Teaching Antitrust After Chicago and Perestroika, 66 NEWYORK UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 239-263 (1991), which assesses late 1980sand early 1990s Antitrust casebooks and offers suggestions for Antitrustteaching materials.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Kowalski, Andrzej, Leading Law Students to Uncharted Waters and MakingThem Think: Teaching Artificial Intelligence and Law, 2 JOURNAL OF LAW &INFORMATION SCIENCE 185-205 (1991). Kowalski describes developing andteaching a new one-semester course entitled “Legal Reasoning, Expert Systemsand Artificial Intelligence,” in which the students, working in groups, constructrule-based expert systems. Emphasis is placed on the multi- disciplinary natureof the field of artificial intelligence as well as legal theory, reasoning, andphilosophy. The author’s experience may prove useful to those contemplatinga similar course.


AUDIOVISUAL AIDS

Crist, Maria Perez, Technology in the LRW Curriculum – High Tech, LowTech, or No Tech, 5 LEGAL WRITING 93-123 (1999). In part, this articledescribes specific classroom technologies and offers practical suggestions forgetting started and assessing their effectiveness as teaching tools. For theuninitiated, this may be a good starting point to get a general overview ofclassroom technology.

Gillers, Stephen, Getting Personal, 58–AUT LAW & CONTEMPORARYPROBLEMS 61-72 (1995). Teaching goals and use of video vignettes in teachinglegal ethics are described along with student responses to the vignettes.

Lawrence, William H., Diagramming Commercial Paper Transactions, 52OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL 267-278 (1991). To unravel the complicated realmof negotiable commercial paper, often involving multiple legal theories affectingmultiple parties, the author has devised a simple yet comprehensive scheme fordiagramming the relationship among the facts, parties, and corresponding legalprinciples involved. Several diagramming schemes are provided.

Richman, William M., Graphic Forms in Conflict of Laws, 27 THEUNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO LAW REVIEW 631-656 (1996). This piece shows howthe author has been able to incorporate the use of visual aids in his Conflict ofLaws class. Examples of illustrations, charts, graphs, flow charts, anddiagrams used in class are provided.

Sharman, Frank, Kevin Hogan & Tony Cooke, The Evaluation of InteractiveVideo in Law Teaching, 24 LAW TEACHER 112-119 (1990). The authors reporton their study that attempts to evaluate the effectiveness of using interactivevideo in law teaching. Students were randomly assigned to one of three groupsin which the same material was presented by either (1) the lecture method, (2)linear video, or (3) interactive video. While results did not reveal significantdifferences among the learning levels of the three groups, teachers planning touse interactive video may find the data and the authors’ conclusions useful.

BANKRUPTCY

Alexander, Peter C., Peter N. Kutulakis & Robert M. Ackerman, IntegratingAlternative Dispute Resolution into the Bankruptcy Curriculum, 102DICKINSON LAW REVIEW 259-275 (1998). (See Alternative DisputeResolution/Mediation.)

2000 BIBLIOGRAPHY 9

CASE METHOD

Davis, Peggy Cooper & Elizabeth Ehrenfest Steinglass, A Dialogue AboutSocratic Teaching, 23 NEW YORK UNIVERSITY REVIEW OF LAW & SOCIALCHANGE 249-279 (1997). The authors believe the goal of legal education is to“provide context in which students can learn fundamental legal concepts,develop intellectual versatility, learn to use the range of intellectual capacitiesacross the range of lawyering tasks, and develop a critical consciousness abouttheir professional role.” (p. 252) They contend the Socratic method has itsplace in the legal education enterprise, but not to the exclusion of other teachingmethods, specifically experiential learning. Part I of the essay describes thedialogic method attributed to Socrates. Part II contains a brief description ofLangdell’s introduction of the Socratic techniques to law teaching. Part IIIdescribes the contemporary Socratic method along with its strengths andweaknesses in light of the respective pedagogic goals.

Eisele, Thomas D., Bitter Knowledge: Socrates and Teaching byDisillusionment, 45 MERCER LAW REVIEW 587-620 (1994). The author givesa thorough account of his teaching philosophy and methods. A proponent of theSocratic method, Eisele believes that “teaching by means of disillusionment isa part of the ethics of legal education.” (p. 588) In other words, his premise islearning is a never-ending proposition and we can only hope to learn byacknowledging our ignorance. Therefore, the good teacher’s responsibility is tomake students aware of this by teaching through disillusionment or bitterknowledge—“You don’t know what you think you know.” (p. 614) However,the lesson is only half done at this point. The teacher must also be willing toreciprocate by making a fair attempt at listening and trying to understand—forthe learner may “know more . . . than what [they] think [they] know.” (p. 616)The author acknowledges his teaching method may bruise egos along the way,but this is often necessary to achieve true learning via the Socratic method.

Grano, Joseph D., Teaching Roe and Lochner, 42 WAYNE LAW REVIEW1973-1997 (1996). To demonstrate the interpretational methodology involvedin substantive due process cases, Grano teaches Roe v. Wade and Lochner v.New York together and basically asks the same questions in class in bothsessions. To illustrate, he outlines a set of ten questions raised in teaching Roeand Lochner together. Suggested answers follow each question.

Hawkins-Leon, Cynthia G., The Socratic Method – Problem MethodDichotomy: The Debate Over Teaching Method Continues, 1998 BRIGHAMYOUNG UNIVERSITY EDUCATION & LAW JOURNAL 1-18 (1998). The benefitsand pitfalls of the Socratic versus problem teaching methods are outlined and


compared. The method used depends largely on context. However, the authorconcludes the problem method may be more gender neutral in relation tolearning styles and better suited overall for comprehension and retention ofmaterial.

Rosato, Jennifer L., The Socratic Method and Women Law Students:Humanize, Don’t Feminize, 7 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REVIEW OF LAW &WOMEN’S STUDIES 37-62 (1997). The author discusses the negative effect oflegal education on women, but sees many positive benefits of the Socraticmethod. She concludes the Socratic method should be retained but “humanized”by fostering on “ethic of care” in the classroom and demystifying the learningprocess.

Weaver, Russell L., Langdell’s Legacy: Living with the Case Method, 36VILLANOVA LAW REVIEW 517-596 (1991). After lengthy examinations of thecase method, its history, benefits, shortcomings, and its impact on legaleducation, Weaver suggests some improvements through “Educating StudentsAbout Goals & Objectives,” “Classroom Reinforcement,” “EncouragingIndependent Thought,” and “Examinations.” A revised and shortened versionof this article also appears in 11 LEGAL STUDIES 155-171 (1991).

CASE STUDIES

Dyer, Bruce, Mary-Anne Hughson, John Duns & Sam Ricketson, TeachingNote: Creating a Corporations Law Case Study, 8 LEGAL EDUCATIONREVIEW 161-180 (1997). The authors recount their processes and experiencesin developing and presenting a case study based on an actual court decision foruse in teaching Corporations and Business Associations Law at Monash LawSchool (Australia). The case study took approximately a year to develop andthe process was replete with challenges in such areas as confidentiality,copyright, and privilege. Finally, they offer some reflections on the use of casestudies and their alternatives.

CASEBOOKS

Kelly, Michael J., Teaching International Environmental Law – Tools of theTrade: A Survey of Materials, 28 STETSON LAW REVIEW 1197-1227 (1999).International environment law course books, treatises, topical books, Web sites,and electronic databases are reviewed relative to their respective presentationformats, strengths and weaknesses, and their worth to the professor in a typicallaw school lecture or seminar setting.

2000 BIBLIOGRAPHY 11

Muller, Eric L., A New Law Teacher’s Guide to Choosing a Casebook, 45JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 557-567 (1995). Provides generic advice tobeginning law teachers on casebook selection.

Subrin, Stephen N., Teaching Civil Procedure While You Watch ItDisintegrate, 59 BROOKLYN LAW REVIEW 1155-1190 (1993). After much adoand discussion about the changing and expanding landscape of civil procedure,Subrin describes his simulation, based on two actual cases as a way to providea contextual basis to students. By using simulations, however, the course mustbe pared down to effectively cover other critical areas such as Federal Rules,doctrine, and theory. In short, this piece offers a few teaching kernels andsuggestions for the seasoned instructor. For a reaction to Subrin’s articleproviding a different perspective, see Elizabeth M. Schneider’s short response,Structuring Complexity, Disciplining Reality: The Challenge of TeachingCivil Procedure in a Time of Change, 59 BROOKLYN LAW REVIEW 1191-1197(1993).

Symposium, Casebook Review, 20 SEATTLE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 271-352 (1997). This is the first annual issue dedicated to casebook reviews,providing reviews of three commonly used Contracts casebooks: 1) CASES ANDMATERIALS ON CONTRACTS, 5th Edition, by E. Allan Farnsworth & William F.Young (Foundation Press, 1995); 2) CONTRACTS AND RELATED OBLIGATIONS:THEORY, DOCTRINE, AND PRACTICE, 3rd Edition, by Robert S. Summers andRobert A. Hillman (West Publishing Co., 1992); and 3) CONTRACTS, CASESAND DOCTRINE, by Randy E. Barnett (Little, Brown and Co., 1995).

Symposium, Casebook Review, 21 SEATTLE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW719-1038 (1998). This symposium issue begins by tracing the evolution ofConstitutional Law casebooks, then collects essays on more than a dozendifferent textbooks. Many of the articles also address how the individualreviewer uses the text in the classroom.

Symposium, Casebook Review, 22 SEATTLE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 867-1055 (1999). This symposium issue includes nine articles reviewing andcommenting on five of the seventeen property casebooks in general circulation.Besides describing how each author adapts and supplements the varioustextbooks for their classes, the authors discuss such topics as limitations incoverage, goals of the course, and methods of supplementation. This would bea good starting place for new property teachers setting up a course for the firsttime and for experienced teachers thinking about changing their texts.


CIVIL PROCEDURE

Glannon, Joseph W., Terry Jean Seligmann, Medb Mahony Sichko & LindaSandstrom Simard, Coordinating Civil Procedure with Legal Research andWriting: A Field Experiment, 47 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 246-259(1997). The authors report on a year-long collaboration in teaching LegalResearch and Writing and Civil Procedure. Legal Research and Writing facultyassigned memos, briefs, simulations, and demonstration exercises based onCivil Procedure topics. The authors conclude students benefit from this kind ofcoordination.

Vaughn, Robert G., Use of Simulations in a First-Year Civil Procedure Class,45 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 480-486 (1995). Vaughn describes a seriesof simulations he uses in his civil procedure course. He uses simulations thatinvolve motion practice, drafting, negotiation, and legislative hearing, all ofwhich help to illustrate content and provide context.

CLINICAL EDUCATION

Aaronson, Mark Neal, We Ask You to Consider: Learning About PracticalJudgment in Lawyering, 4 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 247-320 (1998). The firstsection of this article explores conceptually what is involved in exercisingjudgment. Drawing on legal and non-legal literature, the author offers a set ofideas about what is good lawyering judgment. In the second section, hediscusses learning and teaching judgment, describing some of the approachesand techniques he has used at the Hastings Civil Justice Clinic to encourage thedevelopment of good lawyering judgment.

Aiken, Jane Harris, Striving to Teach “Justice, Fairness, and Morality,” 4CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 1-64 (1997). The author outlines a learning theory thatoffers a model for teaching about justice through the systematic study ofevidence of injustice. She then describes a clinical experience in which thestudents: (1) encounter injustices in the course of representing clients, and (2)analyze how and why the experience affected the students’ sense of justice.Finally, she examines ways in which the learning theory can be used in otherclinical and traditional law school courses.

Baker, Brook K., Learning to Fish, Fishing to Learn: Guided Participationin the Interpersonal Ecology of Practice, 6 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 1-84(1999). Baker argues for an “ecological approach” to clinical supervision wheresupport for student learning is well timed and matched to needs. He includes a


number of charts to explain his theory, based on a social participation theoryof adult education.

Brustin, Stacy L. & David F. Chavkin, Testing the Grades: EvaluatingGrading Models in Clinical Legal Education, 3 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW299-336 (1997). This article describes the structure and findings of a studyconducted by the teaching clinicians at Catholic University to determinewhether grading in clinics enhance students’ learning. Although the sample wassmall and the duration of the study was limited to one semester, the “evidenceindicates that there are tangible benefits to be achieved by providing studentswith the opportunity to be graded in clinical courses.” (p. 326) The Appendicesoutline the evaluation and grading criteria.

Coss, Graeme, Field Placement (Externship) – A Valuable Application ofClinical Education?, 4 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 29-62 (1993). This articlediscusses the advantages and limitations of externship programs. The authordescribes a variety of externship programs at law schools in the United States,Canada and England. Cross concludes that externships can be a valuableresource if there is proper planning, faculty involvement, and adequatesupervision.

Grosberg, Lawrence M., Should We Test for Interpersonal Lawyering Skills?,2 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 349-384 (1996). For the teacher consideringalternative methods of testing for lawyering skills, Part III presents three testingtechniques: (1) performance tests, (2) video performance test, and (3)interactive video exam. Each method is described in detail and the advantagesand limitations are outlined.

Hartwell, Steven, Promoting Moral Development Through ExperientialTeaching, 1 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 505-539 (1995). “This article . . . reportson how a series of semester-long experientially taught legal ethics coursespromoted moral reasoning.” (p. 506) Relying on Kohlberg’s theory of moraldevelopment, the author in Part III describes how he taught the experientialprofessional responsibility courses and the impact it had on students’ moralreasoning.

Kovach, Kimberlee K., The Lawyer as Teacher: The Role of Education inLawyering, 4 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 359-390 (1998). (See AlternativeDispute Resolution/Mediation.)

Mack, Kathy, Bringing Clinical Learning into a Conventional Classroom, 4LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 89-112 (1993). This essay provides insights and


explores methods that may be integrated into existing legal education coursesfrom an Australian perspective.

Morton, Linda, Creating a Classroom Component for Field PlacementPrograms: Enhancing Clinical Goals with Feminist Pedagogy, 45 MAINELAW REVIEW 19-52 (1993). Morton traces the development of field placementprograms and shows how feminist teaching methodology can be used toincrease self-learning and establish a more collaborative learning environmentin the field placement class.

Morton, Linda, Teaching Creative Problem Solving: A ParadigmaticApproach, 34 CALIFORNIA WESTERN LAW REVIEW 375-388 (1998). Afteradvocating the incorporation of creative problem solving into the law schoolcurriculum, the author describes her visual model used to teach creativeproblem solving in clinical courses, and suggests ways it can be used intraditional substantive courses.

Ogilvy, J.P., The Use of Journals in Legal Education: A Tool for Reflection,3 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 55-107 (1996). This article “introduces some of theliterature on critical thinking and learning theory that supports the assignmentof journals [regular, written student entries related to the course of study] . . .it provides a starting point for articulating pedagogical goals that can be metthrough journal assignments.” (p. 56)

O’Leary, Kimberly E., Using “Difference Analysis” to Teach Problem-Solving, 4 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 65-107 (1997). This article explores howclinicians, as well as others, can better integrate “difference analysis” intoteaching problem-solving to law students. “Difference analysis” teachesstudents “to engage in routine examinations of a diverse range of viewpointswhen assisting clients rather than focusing primarily on options derived fromthe student’s own world-view.” (p. 66) Part III describes in detail how aclinical course might integrate “difference analysis” throughout the course.

Quigley, Fran, Seizing the Disorienting Moment: Adult Learning Theory andThe Teaching of Social Justice in Law School Clinics, 2 CLINICAL LAWREVIEW 37-72 (1995). While advocating that a complete legal education(including clinical education) should include lessons of social justice, the authorbriefly outlines a few proposed teaching methodologies that provideopportunities for effective social justice learning in law school clinical courses.

Reekie, Roy, Creating Painters: The Art of Being a Clinical Law Teacher(Part 1) (Towards a Counter-Socratic Method, via Dialogical Empowerment


for Critical Awareness), 9 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGAL EDUCATION137-148 (1991). First, the author offers theoretical and philosophicalgroundings for clinical legal education based on the theories of Paulo Freire, aBrazilian educator. The essence of Freire’s methodology, “lies in the processof dialogical empowerment of the student.” (p. 140) In other words, studentslearn better through a process of mutual inquiry with the teacher. Reekie thenproceeds to describe specific elements of the Professional Practice program atMonash University (Australia).

Shalleck, Ann, Clinical Contexts: Theory and Practice in Law andSupervision, 21 NEW YORK UNIVERSITY REVIEW OF LAW & SOCIAL CHANGE109-182 (1993-94). Shalleck describes her vision of the role of supervision ina clinical setting. She explores decisions a supervisor may make in a specificcase and then broadens her discussion by analyzing six contexts that affect thesupervisor’s decision-making process.

Weinstein, Janet, Teaching Mediation in Law Schools: Training Lawyers tobe Wise, 35 NEW YORK LAW SCHOOL LAW REVIEW 199-238 (1990). (SeeAlternative Dispute Resolution/Mediation.)

COMMERCIAL PAPER

Lawrence, Williams H., Diagramming Commercial Paper Transactions, 52OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL 267-278 (1991). (See Audiovisual Aids.)

COMPUTERS

Downie, Jocelyn, Michael Deturbide & Laura Fraser, A Computer-AssistedLegal Research and Writing Course, 21 DALHOUSIE LAW JOURNAL 429-439(1998). In this short piece, “the authors describe and assess their experiencewith the use of WebCT (a computer program that facilitates the creation andmanagement of courses using the Internet) in the Dalhousie Legal Research &Writing Program.” (p. 329) Among other things, they explain how they usedWebCT, and conclude it can be a useful tool in legal research and writingcourses.

Geist, Michael A., Where Can You Go Today?: The Computerization of LegalEducation from Workbooks to the Web, 11 HARVARD JOURNAL OF LAW &TECHNOLOGY 141-183 (1997). After tracing the role of computers in legaleducation and recognizing their current ubiquitous use, Geist suggests howlegal educators might use the Web to enrich their teaching. He outlines threepossibilities for using the Web: to deliver traditional information and new


information, creating new teaching tools such as visual simulations, and Weblectures.

Rawson, Shirley L. & Alan L. Tyree, Fred Keller Goes to Law School, 2LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 253-276 (1990-91). As an alternative teachingmethod, the authors describe the “Keller Plan,” or Personalised System ofInstruction (PSI), to teach 130 students enrolled in a Technology Law class atthe University of Sydney Law School (Australia). Under PSI, students studyand learn in modules and can only advance to the next module by gaining“mastery” of the unit. Mastery is determined by examination of the student.From an instructor’s point of view, Rawson and Tyree found test preparationto be one of the most demanding aspects of PSI. Allowing students to progressat their own rate, primarily by reading through the modules, provides distinctadvantages over traditional teaching methods. However, PSI courses rely onwritten materials as the primary means of student/teacher communication – thelecture method is for the most part abandoned. The authors do a thorough jobof describing the advantages and pitfalls in applying PSI to their Technologycourse.

Sharman, Frank, Kevin Hogan & Tony Cooke, The Evaluation of InteractiveVideo in Law Teaching, 24 LAW TEACHER 112-119 (1990). (See AudiovisualAids.)

Silecchia, Lucia Ann, Of Painters, Sculptors, Quill Pens, and Microchips:Teaching Legal Writers in the Electronic Age, 75 NEBRASKA LAW REVIEW802-846 (1996). The use of computer technology by legal writing students ispervasive, and Silecchia outlines the dangers and advantages of thisdevelopment. She describes the approaches she implemented to ensure studentsuse technology in a constructive manner so as to improve their writing andprofessional skills.

Warner, Richard, Stephen D. Sowle & Will Sadler, Teaching Law WithComputers, 24 RUTGERS COMPUTER & TECHNOLOGY LAW JOURNAL 107-185(1998). The authors describe how to integrate computers, related technology,and related methods into law teaching, based on their experience withChicago-Kent’s E-LEARN section.

Young, Max, Constructing C.A.L. Tutorials, 26 LAW TEACHER 145-150(1992). This article briefly discusses the factors, largely adopted from Burris(Burris, R., Critical Features of Microcomputer Based Exercises for EffectiveTeaching and Learning of Law, YEARBOOK OF LAW COMPUTER AND


TECHNOLOGY (1987)) that should be considered in designing computer assistedlearning (C.A.L.) lessons.

CONFLICT OF LAWS

Richman, William M., Graphic Forms in Conflict of Laws, 27 THEUNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO LAW REVIEW 631-656 (1996). (See AudiovisualAids.)

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Bell, Derrick, A Pre-Memorial Message on Law School Teaching, 23 NEWYORK UNIVERSITY REVIEW OF LAW AND SOCIAL CHANGE 205-215 (1997). Asthe author reflects on his four decades of law teaching, the reader is able toglean several of the author’s teaching techniques, particularly as they relate toparticipatory teaching methods and Constitutional Law.

Grano, Joseph D., Teaching Roe and Lochner, 42 WAYNE LAW REVIEW1973-1997 (1996). (See Case Method.)

Symposium, Casebook Review, 21 SEATTLE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW719-1051 (1998). (See Casebooks.)

Volokh, Eugene, Robert J. Cottrol, Sanford Levinson, L.A. Powe, Jr. & GlennHarlan Reynolds, The Second Amendment as Teaching Tool in ConstitutionalLaw Classes, 48 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 591-614 (1998). FiveConstitutional law teachers describe how they use the Second Amendment toaccomplish different teaching goals. Goals discussed include teaching studentsto: (1) see things from the other side, (2) understand different modalities ofconstitutional argument, (3) deepen their understanding of checks and balancesand other provisions, and (4) debate clashes between constitutional guaranteesand powerful governmental interests.

CONTRACTS

Buckley, Ross P., Incorporating Dispute Resolution and Drafting Skills Intoa Substantive Law Course, 16 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGAL EDUCATION261-269 (1998). (See Alternative Dispute Resolution/Mediation. SkillsTraining.) Butler, Des & Leanne Wiseman, Viva the Viva: Oral Examinations inContract Law, 4 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 331-351 (1993). Believing oral


expression and presentation are important skills, some law faculty atQueensland University of Technology (Australia) describe their use of oralexaminations as an alternative to written research assignments for part of astudent’s Contracts grade. This article describes the procedure, method offormulating questions, performance checklist, and data on student responses.

Goh, Bee Chen, Some Approaches to Student-Centred Learning in LegalEducation, 28 LAW TEACHER 158-167 (1994). The author first defines“student-centred learning” and proceeds to briefly describe three suggestedapproaches used in this method of teaching: Peer Testing, Student as Teachers,and Small Group Teaching.

Macfarlane, Julie & John Manwaring, Using Problem-Based Learning toTeach First Year Contracts, 16 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGALEDUCATION 271-298 (1998). This paper describes and evaluates the authors’collaboration in and experiment with problem-based learning (PBL) in a firstyear contracts course at two Canadian law schools. They describe PBL anddistinguish it from other methods. The exercises used, pedagogical objectives,problem design, and assessment are also discussed.

MacFarlane, Peter J.M. & Gordon Joughin, An Integrated Approach toTeaching and Learning Law: The Use of Student Peer Mentor Groups toImprove the Quality of Student Learning in Contracts, 5 LEGAL EDUCATIONREVIEW 153-172 (1994). This paper describes the redesign of a first-yearContracts course at the Queensland University of Technology Law School(Australia). It outlines the processes involved in the redesign along with thecorresponding teaching strategies. The course is divided into eleven two-weekmodules, each employing tightly integrated teaching and learning strategies thatare outlined in the paper.

Rule, Ella, An Experiment in Peer Assessment in LL.B. Year 1, 29 LAWTEACHER 295-310 (1995). Students assess other classmate’s writtenassignments in a first year Contracts course as a way to learn both substantiveconcepts and legal writing. The author describes her experiences and providessuggestions for improving this method of teaching. The Appendix contains atypical student rating sheet used in a Contracts assignment.

Sokolow, David Simon, From Kurosawa to (Duncan) Kennedy: The Lessonsof Rashomon for Current Legal Education, 1991 WISCONSIN LAW REVIEW969-987 (1991). Recognizing the woeful disregard for teaching facts in lawschools, Professor Sokolow “concludes that the legal educators’ preference toteach law as if facts were unimportant derives from the threat factual


indeterminancy poses to the traditional approach to legal education embodiedin the ‘Socratic method.’” (p. 969) He attempts to address the dilemma bydevising and describing a simple pedagogical experiment designed to teachstudents in his Contracts class about the importance of facts. He recounts themistakes made when showing the classic Japanese film Rashomon, which wasintended to show students that facts are subject to interpretation. Theunanticipated student reactions are discussed with an eye towards improvingwhat went wrong.

Symposium, Casebook Review, 20 SEATTLE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 271-352 (1997). (See Casebooks.)

Widdison, Robin, Michael Aikenhead & Tom Allen, Computer Simulation inLegal Education, 5 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LAW & INFORMATIONTECHNOLOGY 279-307 (1997). After surveying and assessing the use ofcomputer simulation programs in law schools, this article describes an array ofspecific simulation games. Also, the authors demonstrate, through the use of acontracts case study, the potential for developing simulation games involvingsubstantive rather than procedural law.

CORPORATIONS

Dyer, Bruce, Mary-Anne Hughson, John Duns & Sam Ricketson, TeachingNote: Creating a Corporations Law Case Study, 8 LEGAL EDUCATIONREVIEW 161-180 (1997). (See Case Studies.)

Nathanson, Stephen, Developing Legal Problem-Solving Skills, 44 JOURNALOF LEGAL EDUCATION 215-231 (1994). The first part of the paper includes adescription of the author’s experiences in developing and designing problemsolving into his courses. In Part Two, he proceeds to outline the principles forteaching problem solving and shows how to incorporate them into aCommercial Law and Practice course.

Tzannes, Maria & Philip King, Meeting Procedure: A Vehicle to Better TeachCorporations Law and a Professional Legal Skill, 15 JOURNAL OFPROFESSIONAL LEGAL EDUCATION 123-136 (1997). Recognizing that manylaw students experience difficulty with Corporations and Business Lawcourses, the faculty of the University of Western Sydney, MacArthur(Australia), designed a new course: Law of Association. The article outlines theteaching philosophy, design of the materials, description of student and teachingactivities, and outcomes and evaluations of the course.


CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE

Alschuler, Albert W., Introduction: Adding a Comparative Perspective toAmerican Criminal Procedure Classes, 100 WEST VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW765-771 (1998). The author briefly describes how he incorporates JohnLangbein’s teaching materials titled COMPARATIVE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE:GERMANY. He teaches from the Langbein book in the final two or three classesof his Criminal Procedure course. Although the materials are somewhat dated,they provide a comparative perspective of the U.S. and German systems.

Ball, Wendy & Jacquelin Mackinnon, Teaching the Unthinkable: Approachesto Effective/Protected Learning in the Area of Sexual Offences, 8 LEGALEDUCATION REVIEW 99-111 (1997). The authors discuss the rationale for andcontent of an optional segment of a Crimes course at the University of Waikato(New Zealand). This paper identifies some of the barriers to teaching the lawof sexual violation and the approaches they take to minimize the problems.

Cobley, Cathy & Stephen White, Specimen and Model Answers in LawTeaching, 28 LAW TEACHER 36-55 (1994). This piece describes how modelanswers can be used to improve legal writing by having students compare theirinitial written answers against model answers. The students are also asked to“grade” and comment on the model answers. The Appendix contains examplesof eight model answers that students are asked to “grade.”

Frase, Richard S., Main-streaming Comparative Criminal Justice: How ToIncorporate Comparative and International Concepts and Materials intoBasic Criminal Law and Procedure Courses, 100 WEST VIRGINIA LAWREVIEW 773-798 (1998). Frase sets out the advantages and common objectionsto incorporating comparative and international materials into basic criminal lawcourses. He suggests specific areas, such as pretrial procedures and sentencing,where comparative materials could be helpful. He also includes a shortbibliography of resources for further study.

Giles, Marianne, Teaching Criminal Law, 25 LAW TEACHER 214-226 (1991).Using the Clarkson & Keatings, CRIMINAL LAW: TEXT AND MATERIALS (2nded., Sweet and Maxwell, 1990) coursebook in the traditional sense, the authoroutlines her teaching techniques with respect to certain criminal law concepts:What is Crime?, Punishment, Laws and Morals, Harm, Exculpation,Responsibility, and Deception. Her assessment and grading system are alsobriefly described.


Israel, Mark, Teaching Criminology Through Interview-based Assignments,8 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 141-159 (1997). Trying to spice up his classdelivery method, the author conceives and explains a program for teachingcriminology through student interview assignments at Flinders University(Australia). Israel asks his students to write a research paper based oninterviews of people who had been involved in crime or the criminal justicesystem. He thoroughly explains the assignment and student reactions. Some ofthe pedagogical and ethical issues encountered during the five years he has usedthis process are also outlined.

Leaver, Alan, Contextualising Law: An Attempt to Operationalise Theory byTeaching Interviewing in the Law School, 5 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW195-221 (1994). In attempting to integrate skills training in a substantive lawcourse, the author describes the incorporation of interviewing skills in hisCriminal Law class, as adopted by the Law School of the Flinders Universityof South Australia. The interviewing skills component took place within themooting framework of the class and is “detailed before outlining the educationaltheory that justifies the choice of interviewing.” (p. 198) The author thenbriefly describes the interviewing project.

Moskovitz, Myron, Beyond the Case Method: It’s Time to Teach withProblems, 42 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 241-270 (1992). Convinced theproblem method is far better than the case method in training lawyers,Moskovitz documents its superiority. To prove his point, he provides a lengthyexample using a typical casebook assignment in Criminal Procedure, comparingteaching methods, first under the case method and then problem method. Othersections include testing with problems, using the problem method in largeclasses and first year courses, switching to the problem method, writingproblems, and books using the problem method.

CRITICAL LEGAL STUDIES

Calmore, John O., Close Encounters of the Racial Kind: PedagogicalReflections and Seminar Conversations, 31 UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCOLAW REVIEW 903-926 (1997). The author shares his thoughts and techniqueson teaching critical race theory and anti-discrimination courses that take on thedifficult topic of race issues.

CRITIQUE

Harris, Angela P. & Marjorie M. Shultz, “A(nother) Critique of PureReason”: Toward Civic Virtue in Legal Education, 45 STANFORD LAW


REVIEW 1773-1805 (1993). Acknowledging the role of emotion can enrich theclassroom experience, the authors set out to tell their stories, illustrating howthe use of emotion and reason can enhance classroom debate and discussion.

DIVERSITY

Calleros, Charles R., Training a Diverse Student Body for a MulticulturalSociety, 8 LA RAZA LAW JOURNAL 140-165 (1995). The essay covers thebenefit and techniques of confronting issues of diversity in the classroom. It alsooffers advice for managing difficulties that might arise when incorporatingdiversity issues in class. Throughout the piece, reference is made to commentsand reflections of ethnically diverse students’ law school experience.

Clemons, Linda Karen, Alternative Pedagogies for Minority Students, 16THURGOOD MARSHALL LAW REVIEW 635-639 (1991). This short essayprovides brief insights into cultural leaning styles.

Dark, Okianer Christian, Incorporating Issues of Race, Gender, Class, SexualOrientation, and Disability Into Law School Teaching, 32 WILLAMETTE LAWREVIEW 541-575 (1996). This article illustrates why issues of diversity oughtto be taught in every course and how to go about incorporating these issues intothe classroom.

Hing, Bill Ong, Raising Personal Identification Issues of Class, Race,Ethnicity, Gender, Sexual Orientation, Physical Disability, and Age inLawyering Courses, 45 STANFORD LAW REVIEW 1807-1833 (1993). Personalidentification issues involve awareness of and sensitivity to the diversecharacteristics and traits of others. “This paper describes how personalidentification issues are raised in . . . three lawyering classes [LawyeringProcess for Social Change, Immigration Clinic, and Asian Pacific Americansand the Law], discusses the reactions of some students to these issues, andprovides some suggestions as to how issues of identification difference can beraised more effectively [in the classroom].” (p. 1808)

Stanchi, Kathryn M., Resistance is Futile: How Legal Writing PedagogyContributes to the Law’s Marginalization of Outsider Voices, 103 DICKINSONLAW REVIEW 7-57 (1998). The author argues it is necessary to teach criticallegal theory and methodology in the context of lawyering skills, such as legalwriting, in order to make the legal profession less alien for our students whocome from cultures that have been marginalized by society.


EMPLOYMENT LAW

Bisom-Rapp, Susan, Contextualizing the Debate: How Feminist and CriticalRace Scholarship Can Inform the Teaching of Employment DiscriminationLaw, 44 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 366-393 (1994). The author suggestsways in which feminist and critical race theory perspectives can enrich anemployment law course. She uses affirmative action materials to show howbringing in psychological, sociological, economic, and theoretical contexts canenrich student understanding of legal issues.

Lerner, Alan M., Law & Lawyering in the Work Place: Building BetterLawyers by Teaching Students to Exercise Critical Judgment as CreativeProblem Solver, 32 AKRON LAW REVIEW 107-153 (1999). The authordescribes a first-year elective course entitled “Law & Lawyering” that focuseson developing critical judgment and problem-solving skills. Through the use ofsimulations, readings, and invited guests, the students work to solveemployment discrimination problems.

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

Corcos, Christine A., Melvyn R. Durchslag, Andrew P. Morriss & Wendy E.Wagner, Teaching a Megacourse: Adventures in Environmental Policy, TeamTeaching, and Group Grading, 47 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 224-239(1997). The authors describe the content and methodology of a six-credit,two-semester, team-taught course in Environmental Law.

Kelly, Michael J., Teaching International Environmental Law – Tools of theTrade: A Survey of Materials, 28 STETSON LAW REVIEW 1197-1227 (1999).(See Casebooks.)

Robertson, Heidi Gorovitz, Methods for Teaching Environmental Law: SomeThoughts on Providing Access to the Environmental Law System, 23COLUMBIA JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 237-297 (1998). After brieflypointing out the ineffectiveness of the case method for teaching Environmentallaw, Robertson’s article surveys teaching methods aimed at improvingenvironmental legal education. She emphasizes teaching using an environmentallaw system, which includes the governmental bodies and bodies of law thatcontrol environmental law. Part II considers the objectives and goals teachersmay have in teaching their environmental law courses. Part IV describesenvironmental law teaching methods used in the classroom, specificallyteaching methods based on problem-orientation and case studies. Part VIdescribes the environmental law course taught by the author, relying heavily on


problem-oriented and case study approaches. Finally, the Appendices containthe author’s syllabus and other course materials used in an introductoryEnvironmental Law course.

Wirth, David A., Teaching and Research in International Environmental Law,23 HARVARD ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REVIEW 423-440 (1999). Wirth gives anoverview of the emerging field of International Environmental Law anddescribes course design and objectives, teaching materials, and opportunitiesfor practical experience.

ETHICS/PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

Bennett, Jr., Walter H., The University of North Carolina IntergenerationalLegal Ethics Project: Expanding the Contexts for Teaching ProfessionalEthics and Values, 58–AUT Law & Contemporary Problems 173-192 (1995).Through the use of oral history, the chief objective of the University of NorthCarolina (UNC) Law School Intergenerational Legal Ethics Project (unpaged)is to develop approaches that permit ethical issues to be treated in the broaderand deeper contexts of personal character development. Part II discusses howthe UNC Project has addressed three limitations of legal pedagogy for teachingethics. Part III lays out the methodology of oral history and describes themechanics of the legal ethics course.

Burns, Susan, Teaching Legal Ethics, 4 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 141-163(1993). In this article the author reviews recent literature in the area of teachinglegal ethics. She discusses the need for instruction in legal ethics, the differentways in which ethics courses are structured, and teaching methods.

Dzienkowski, John S., Sanford Levinson, Charles Silver & Amon Burton,Integrating Theory and Practice into the Professional ResponsibilityCurriculum at the University of Texas, 58–AUT Law & ContemporaryProblems 213-226 (1995). Working through year one of a three year grant, theauthors describe their efforts to integrate theory and practice into theirprofessional responsibility courses, in light of large classroom settings. Theirgoal is to develop a model course that will help students identify ethical issuesin the practice of law, research ethical problems, and develop an analyticalframework for resolving ethical dilemmas. The sequence of the course isdescribed. The authors encourage faculty to contact them for samples of thetypes of materials developed for the course.

Fejfar, Anthony J., Legal Education and Legal Scholarship: From RationalistDiscourse to Dialogical Encounter, 20 CAPITAL UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW


97-112 (1991). Using discussions of dialogue and historical development ofhuman consciousness as a backdrop for critiquing legal education andscholarship, the author proceeds to describe his teaching methodology inprofessional responsibility. He uses a critical-dialogical approach to teachingas suggested by Paulo Freire, a Brazilian educator. His goal is to “develop alearning environment where, in a context of mutual trust and openness, bothteacher and student grow and learn together.” (p. 109)

Gillers, Stephen, Getting Personal, 58–AUT LAW & CONTEMPORARYPROBLEMS 61-72 (1995). (See Audiovisual Aids.)

Green, Bruce A., Less is More: Teaching Legal Ethics in Context, 39 WILLIAM& MARY LAW REVIEW 357-392 (1998). Starting with the premise that less ismore, Green advocates presenting basic professional responsibility coursescontextually as opposed to the survey type method. In a contextual course theaim is to selectively provide actual settings, issues, and the like so that studentsare able to recognize and resolve ethical dilemmas. According to the author’sexperience, “[a] contextual course is more effective because it provides a betterpicture than the survey course and tends to be better received.” (p. 359) Goalsand teaching methods using contextual course practices are described.

Hartwell, Steven, Promoting Moral Development Through ExperientialTeaching, 1 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 505-539 (1995). (See Clinical Education.)

Liebman, Carol Bensinger, The Professional of Law: Columbia Law School’sUse of Experiential Learning Techniques to Teach ProfessionalResponsibility, 58–AUT Law & Contemporary Problems 73-86 (1995).Columbia’s Profession of Law course, a one-week course required for all 350third-year students, was designed to combat the perception that most legalethics courses fail to engage students because the issues lack relevance. Theauthor incorporates and describes in detail the use of three major simulations:(1) a leasing case violating conflict of interest rules, (2) a capital case violatingclient-attorney privilege and reputation issues, and (3) divorce negotiations.

Moliterno, James E., Teaching Legal Ethics in a Program of ComprehensiveSkills Development, 15 JOURNAL OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION 145-170 (1990).Concerned that law schools are not doing enough to adequately instill legalskills or ethics, Moliterno discusses William and Mary’s solution to thedilemma—a nine-credit, four semester course of study that relies on heavydoses of ethics teaching. He thoroughly describes the program and itscomponents, such as the structure of student experiences, simulated clientphases, instruction, and grading.


Myers, Eleanor W., Teaching Good and Teaching Well: Integrating Valueswith Theory and Practice, 47 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 401-424 (1997).Myers describes the Integrated Transactional Practice course at TempleUniversity, which merges theory and practice and provides students withopportunities to experience the moral dimension of practicing law. Thistwo-semester course combines Trusts and Estates and ProfessionalResponsibility and includes practice in transactional skills such as interviewing,counseling, drafting, and negotiating.

Rhode, Deborah L., Annotated Bibliography of Educational Materials onLegal Ethics, 58–AUT LAW & CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS 361-389 (1995).The bibliography is clearly aimed at classroom teachers, specifically thoseteaching legal ethics courses as well as those working or considering integratingethics into the law school curriculum. Accordingly, the author notes thematerials cited are intended to enrich legal ethics instruction. Section IIdescribes written and audiovisual resources for teaching professionalresponsibility. Section III describes materials for teaching ethics and integratingethical issues into substantive courses. Finally, Section IV organizes the citedmaterials by law school subject matter.

Symposium, Teaching Legal Ethics, 58–AUT LAW & CONTEMPORARYPROBLEMS 1-389 (1995). W.M. Keck Foundation grant recipients report on theconclusion of their respective grants, whose primary focus was to improvemethods of teaching ethics in law schools. The various articles are grouped intosix thematic areas including, Improving the Required Ethics Course,‘Mainstreaming’ Ethics: The Pervasive Method of Teaching Ethics, DevelopingSpecialized Ethics Courses, and Developing Lawyering Skills: Legal Ethics andClinical Education. While most articles describe how ethics is taught fromcourse design or curricular perspectives, a few provide sufficient pedagogicaldetail to be included individually elsewhere in this bibliography. However, most“essays and articles discuss the continued questioning of traditional methods oflegal education and the search for more efficient and interesting means ofinstruction.” (p. 1)

Turner, Dennis, Infusing Ethical, Moral, and Religious Values into a LawSchool Curriculum: A Modest Proposal, 24 UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON LAWREVIEW 283-317 (1999). This article summarizes various new methodsincorporating professional ethics into the existing curriculum at several lawschools. It also briefly describes methods used in medical and theologicalschools. Finally, the author proposes an approach designed for law schools withlimited resources.


Venter, Christine Mary, Encouraging Personal Responsibility – AnAlternative Approach to Teaching Legal Ethics, 58–AUT LAW &CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS 287-296 (1995). Venter posits that teachingProfessional Responsibility out of a book and without contextual frames ofreference is no way to effectively teach Legal Ethics. The only way, she argues,is by incorporating or teaching Legal Ethics in a clinical setting, where thestudents focus on the ethical issues arising from actual cases. However, thismethod of teaching is very time and staff intensive and can only accommodatea few students at a time.

EVALUATION

Barnes, Jeffrey W., The Functions of Assessment: A Re-Examination, 2 LEGALEDUCATION REVIEW 177-217 (1990-91). The author notes that whileassessment modes have been greatly diversified, the problem-type writtenexamination is still the dominant mode used in Australian law schools.Although written from an Australian perspective, information provided can begenerally applied to any law school setting. Barnes shows assessment serves notonly as a means of certification evaluation but also has an important educationfunction. He proposes nine principles for designing a more broadly based anduseful assessment model.

Brustin, Stacy L. & David F. Chavkin, Testing the Grades: EvaluatingGrading Models in Clinical Legal Education, 3 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW299-336 (1997). (See Clinical Education.)

Craver, Charles B., The Impact of a Pass/Fail Option on Negotiation CoursePerformance, 48 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 176-186 (1998). Craverdescribes his negotiation course and debates the pros and cons of grades versuspass/fail options in this course. His data from eleven years suggests that gradedstudents achieve more beneficial negotiating results in the simulation exercises,but that there is little meaningful difference between graded and pass/failstudents’ scores on papers.

Gordon, Daniel, Does Law Teaching Have Meaning? Teaching Effectiveness,Gauging Alumni Competence, and The MacCrate Report, 25 FORDHAMURBAN LAW JOURNAL 43-83 (1997). Gordon believes current methods offaculty evaluation by students is the “student consumer marketplace” and thata better gauge of teaching effectiveness would be to survey alumni on how welltheir instructors prepared them to be effective lawyers. A sample “Teaching andLearning Survey” form is provided.


Grosberg, Lawrence M., Should We Test for Interpersonal Lawyering Skills?,2 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 349-384 (1996). (See Clinical Education.)

Keating, Daniel, Ten Myths About Law School Grading, 76 WASHINGTONUNIVERSITY LAW QUARTERLY 171-191 (1998). Class grading and assessmenthave not been a typical topic written about in the legal literature. In this essay,the author hopes that we re-think our existing assumptions about law schoolgrading. Novice as well as seasoned teachers will find useful the section onteacher-student relations, even though it involves dynamics outside of class.

Keyes, Mary E. & Michael J. Whincop, The Moot Reconceived: Some Theoryand Evidence on Legal Skills, 8 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 1-41 (1997).Since the authors believe assessment theory should inform the structure, contentand process of skills training, they begin by reviewing learning theory,especially as it applies to the traditional moot (moot court experience). Theythen develop an alternative moot plan based on learning theory principles. Theygive a detailed description as well as the advantages and disadvantages of themoot project they developed for a third-year tax class.

Maharg, Paul, The Culture of Mnemosyne: Open-Book Assessment and theTheory and Practice of Legal Education, 6 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THELEGAL PROFESSION 219-239 (1999). As the author wrestles with the issues ofopen book exams, he manages to offer some insights into their benefits andpitfalls.

Miller, Douglas, Using Examinations in First-Year Legal Research, Writing,& Reasoning Courses, 3 LEGAL WRITING 217-239 (1997). While advocatingand justifying the use of examinations in first-year legal research, writing andreasoning courses, the author includes actual exam questions he has used.

EVIDENCE

Gunning, Isabelle R., An Essay on Teaching Race Issues in the RequiredEvidence Course: More Lessons From the O.J. Simpson Case, 28SOUTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 355-365 (1999). By using theWaltz & Park, CASES AND MATERIALS ON EVIDENCE (8th ed. 1995) casebookand selective cases such as United States v. Abel, In re Anthony P., andCalifornia v. Simpson, this essay explains how the author incorporates racialand bias issues into a required Evidence course.

Shapiro, Stephen J., The Use and Effectiveness of Various Learning Materialsin an Evidence Class, 46 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 101-109 (1996).


Professor Shapiro discusses the effectiveness of using three outside sources inhis evidence course: readings from the casebook, a hornbook, and CALIexercises. He concludes the CALI exercises resulted in an improvement instudent performance.

Yen, Alfred C., The Art and Craft of Teaching: Art Resting on Craft, 10 ST.LOUIS UNIVERSITY PUBLIC LAW REVIEW 241-245 (1991). The authorcompares teachers to other artists such as musicians and actors. He sees theteacher’s craft as grounded in technical mastery of the subject and art as anability to use tools (teaching methods) to create a desired outcome. To illustratehis points, the author describes how he teaches conditional relevance in hisEvidence class.

EXTERNSHIPS

Caplow, Stacy, From Courtroom to Classroom: Creating an AcademicComponent to Enhance the Skills and Values Learned in a Student JudicialClerkship Clinic, 75 NEBRASKA LAW REVIEW 872-915 (1996). Havingdeveloped and administered a clerkship externship program, one of the author’sstated objectives is to supply information about the program design andcurriculum that can help others in the process of either creating or improvingjudicial clerkship clinics. Equally enlightening is the explanation of herpedagogical evolution and her description of the teaching goals, premises, andmaterials as outlined in the Appendices.

Eyster, Mary Jo, Designing and Teaching the Large Externship Clinic, 5CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 347-401 (1999). In addition to discussing designconsiderations of an externship program, Section II describes a number ofteaching methods that may be used in the seminar portion of the clinic.Although the article is aimed at newer externship teachers and directors,experienced faculty who are called upon to create or redesign an externshipprogram may find it equally helpful.

Katz, Harriet N., Personal Journals in Law School Externship Programs:Improving Pedagogy, 1 THOMAS M. COOLEY JOURNAL OF PRACTICE &CLINICAL LAW 7-58 (1997). The pedagogical basis for a journal writingassignment in a legal externship program is described followed by anexplanation of specific journal assignments. Moreover, through a study of herown students’ journals, the author suggests ways to improve journalingassignments.


FAMILY LAW

Shalleck, Ann, Feminist Theory & Feminist Method: Transforming theExperience of the Classroom, 7 AMERICAN UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF GENDER& THE LAW 229-233 (1999). This short piece describes an exercise in a FamilyLaw class that incorporate feminist theory into the classroom.

FEMINIST LEGAL THEORY

Landry, Elaine M. & Anne Donnellon, Teaching Negotiation with a FeministPerspective, 15 NEGOTIATION JOURNAL 21-29 (1999). (See AlternativeDispute Resolution/Mediation.)

Mossman, Mary Jane, Gender Issues in Teaching Methods: Reflections onShifting the Paradigm, 6 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 129-152 (1995). Thispaper focuses on gender issues in teaching methods. The author contraststraditional ideas about law and pedagogy and feminist challenges to them. Shedescribes the problems facing feminist law teachers in large and diverseclassrooms and shows that the gendered subjectivity of both teacher andstudents can affect both teaching and learning.

Otto, Dianne, Integrating Questions of Gender Into Discussion of “the Use ofForce” in the International Law Curriculum, 6 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW219-227 (1995). First, the author outlines the shortcomings of the internationallegal approach to violence and its repercussions for women. Secondly, shediscusses some of the implications this has on the teaching of international lawand offers four strategies that encourage critical thinking in this area.

Orford, Anne, Citizenship, Sovereignty and Globalisation: TeachingInternational Law in the Post-Soviet Era, 6 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW251-261 (1995). This paper describes the ways in which international law canbe enhanced by the inclusion of materials that question the central notions ofcitizenship and sovereignty. The author challenges the dominant conception ofthe citizen as a neutral disembodied individual: a concept that operates toexclude certain groups. She argues exposure to feminist post-colonial andcritical theory while unsettling can lead to a deeper and more “ethical”understanding of law and will turn the classroom into a dynamic place.

Seuffert, Nan, Feminist Epistemologies and a Law-In-Context JurisprudenceCourse: A New Zealand Experience, 6 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 153-167(1995). According to the author, feminist epistemologies are useful tools indeveloping strategies for teaching. They focus educators on the social and


political context in which the knowledge we teach was produced and on thepolitical and social context in which that knowledge is re-produced when weteach it. The author describes how these concepts influenced the design,substance and teaching methods of a jurisprudence course at the University ofWaikato Law School (New Zealand).

Shalleck, Ann, Feminist Theory & Feminist Method: Transforming theExperience of the Classroom, 7 AMERICAN UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF GENDERAND THE LAW 229-233 (1999). (See Family Law.)

Torrey, Morrison, Jackie Casey & Karin Olson, Teaching Law in a FeministManner: A Commentary From Experience, 13 HARVARD WOMEN’S LAWJOURNAL 87-135 (1990). With the aid of two student co-authors, the principalauthor recounts in detail her Feminist Jurisprudence seminar. The courseformat, typical of a research and writing seminar, included six weeks of class,four weeks of research, and four weeks of oral presentations. The seminar wasdesigned to develop independent research skills, critical thinking, and effectivecommunication. The article fully describes the seminar’s approach, teachingmethodology, grading, and goals. Student observations, reactions, andcomments by the student co-authors are interwoven throughout the article.

GENDER

Alegre, Marcela Huaita, Integrating Gender Into Legal Education: TheObstacles, Challenges and Possibilities, 7 JOURNAL OF GENDER, SOCIALPOLICY & THE LAW 279-290 (1998-99). “There are many ways to introducethe gender perspective into the teaching of law, such as offering specializedcourses, including new contents in basic courses, developing legal theory,developing legislative proposals, and systematizing the case law.” (p. 279) Thisessay outlines these challenges and possibilities.

Bender, Leslie, Teaching Torts As If Gender Matters: Intentional Torts, 2VIRGINIA JOURNAL OF SOCIAL POLICY & THE LAW 115-163 (1994). Part Idiscusses ways in which gender affects tort casebooks, classes, and teaching.The second part offers general suggestions of what law professors can do toteach gender in the torts classes. Finally, Bender illustrates examples from herfirst-year torts class on teaching torts as if gender matters.

Bisom-Rapp, Susan, Contextualizing the Debate: How Feminist and CriticalRace Scholarship Can Inform the Teaching of Employment DiscriminationLaw, 44 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 366-393 (1994). (See EmploymentLaw.)


Greenberg, Judith G. & Robert V. Ward, Teaching Race and the Law ThroughNarrative, 30 WAKE FOREST LAW REVIEW 323-345 (1995). The authors reporton a course they taught on the two Rodney King trials that was used as a forumto talk about race and the law. They describe using narratives to overcomestudents’ reluctance to talk about race.

Gunning, Isabelle R., An Essay on Teaching Race Issues in the RequiredEvidence Course: More Lessons From the O.J. Simpson Case, 28SOUTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 355-365 (1999). (See Evidence.Race.)

Mossman, Mary Jane, Gender Issues in Teaching Methods: Reflections onShifting the Paradigm, 6 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 129-152 (1995). (SeeFeminist Legal Theory.)

Rosato, Jennifer L., The Socratic Method and Women Law Students:Humanize, Don’t Feminize, 7 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REVIEW OF LAW &WOMEN’S STUDIES 37-62 (1997). (See Case Method.)

Scales-Trent, Judy, Sameness and Difference in a Law School Classroom:Working at the Crossroads, 4 YALE JOURNAL OF LAW & FEMINISM 415-438(1992). The author gives examples of how to encourage students to exploredifferent perspectives. She cites materials she has used in courses such asConstitutional Law, Employment Discrimination Law, and Law and SocialChange.

Scales-Trent, Judy, Using Literature in Law School: The Importance ofReading and Telling Stories, 7 BERKELEY WOMEN’S LAW JOURNAL 90-124(1992). The piece describes what the author hoped to achieve and how sheincorporated literature into her “Legal & Policy Issues Affecting Women ofColor” course. The footnotes are laden with citations referring to works by andabout women of color. The essay is also sprinkled with student observationsand reflections about their readings.

Thiemann, Sarah E., Beyond Guinier: A Critique of Legal Pedagogy, 24 NEWYORK UNIVERSITY REVIEW OF LAW & SOCIAL CHANGE 17-41 (1998). Theauthor introduces several theories of pedagogy and explains how traditional lawschool classrooms work against several tenets of effective teaching. She makessuggestions for improvement including revamping the Socratic method,providing smaller classes, and introducing alternative teaching styles, such asbrainstorming, role playing and narrative.


Torrey, Morrison, Jennifer Ries & Elaine Spiliopoulos, What Every First-YearFemale Law Student Should Know, 7 COLUMBIA JOURNAL OF GENDER & LAW267-311 (1998). This article documents the multiple forms and manifestationsof gender bias in legal education and offers five concrete strategies students canuse to cope with gender bias in law school. The Appendix contains a shortbibliography of articles on this topic.

HEALTH LAW

Davis, Dena S., Tell Me a Story: Using Short Fiction in Teaching Law andBioethics, 47 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 240-245 (1997). Davisdiscusses the use of stories to teach legal issues. Along with stories from casesand guest speakers, the author believes fiction can enrich class discussion.Davis describes some of the advantages of using fiction in teaching “informedconsent” in a Law and Bioethics course.

Jones, Catherine J., Teaching Bioethics in the Law School Classroom: RecentHistory, Rapid Advances, the Challenges of the Future, 20 AMERICANJOURNAL OF LAW & MEDICINE 417-437 (1994). Jones briefly discusses: (1) theimportance of staying current with the doctrine and policies involved inBioethics, (2) assisting students to learn the substance and application of thematerial, (3) incorporating professional responsibility issues into the teaching,and (4) making the course material relevant to the students.

INTERNATIONAL LAW

Levine, Samuel J., Teaching Jewish Law in American Law Schools: AnEmerging Development in Law and Religion, 26 FORDHAM URBAN LAWJOURNAL 1041-1050 (1999). The author describes four models for teaching acourse in Jewish law. He includes a 5-page bibliography of articles on Jewishlaw that have appeared in U.S. law reviews since 1995.

Murdoch, Jim, Using Group Skills in Honours Teaching: The EuropeanHuman Rights Project, 28 LAW TEACHER 258-269 (1994). Murdock discussesthe development and implementation of a self-directed, semester long, smallstudent group course at the University of Glaslow’s School of Law (Scotland),whereby students are expected to conduct extensive research and preparationon a European Human Rights Convention issue, culminating in mock oralarguments. Student selection for the course, skills development, and studentassessment are among the topics covered.


Otto, Dianne, Integrating Questions of Gender Into Discussion of “the Use ofForce” in the International Law Curriculum, 6 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW219-227 (1995). (See Feminist Legal Theory.)

Orford, Anne, Citizenship, Sovereignty and Globalisation: TeachingInternational Law in the Post-Soviet Era, 6 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW251-261 (1995). (See Feminist Legal Theory.)

Reitz, John C., How to do Comparative Law, 46 AMERICAN JOURNAL OFCOMPARATIVE LAW 617-636 (1998). Reitz describes nine essentials of thecomparative law method. He describes the difference between comparative lawand foreign law, the basic techniques of comparing law, and gives guidelines forcarrying out legal comparisons.

Strauss, Andrew L., Creating and Conducting In-Class Simulations in PublicInternational Law: A Producer’s Guide, 4 ILSA JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL& COMPARATIVE LAW 669-681 (1998). The author describes his experience increating and using simulations using Public International law as the backdrop.The piece consists of several parts: goals in constructing simulations;simulation problem setting; creating the simulation problem; constructing theprocedural foundation for the simulation; incorporating student participation;helping students prepare for the simulation; how to conduct the simulation;preparing the classroom for the simulation; feedback of performance; gradingthe simulation; and suggestions for better simulations.

Wirth, David A., Teaching and Research in International Environmental Law,23 HARVARD ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REVIEW 423-440 (1999). (SeeEnvironmental Law.)

JURISPRUDENCE

Kissam, Philip C., Disturbing Images: Literature in a Jurisprudence Course,22 LEGAL STUDIES FORUM 329-351 (1998). Using such works as Antigone,The Merchant of Venice, and Billy Budd, along with more traditional works toteach the nature of law, Kissam discusses how he integrates literature into hisJurisprudence course and explains why he believes literature enrichesdiscussions of law.

Seuffert, Nan, Feminist Epistemologies and a Law-In-Context JurisprudenceCourse: A New Zealand Experience, 6 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 153-167(1995). (See Feminist Legal Theory.)


Torrey, Morrison, Jackie Casey & Karin Olson, Teaching Law in a FeministManner: A Commentary From Experience, 13 HARVARD WOMEN’S LAWJOURNAL 87-135 (1990). (See Gender.)

LEARNING

Bond, Carol & Marlene Le Brun, Promoting Learning in Law, 7 LEGALEDUCATION REVIEW 1-29 (1996). This article focuses on relatively recentresearch into how students learn. The authors describe the work of Martin andits implication for teaching and learning law. After describing differentconceptions of learning, Bond and Le Brun present two case studies illustratingdifferent approaches—a “surface” approach and a “deep” approach, whichdemonstrate how two different students view the nature of law.

Boyle, Robin A. & Rita Dunn, Teaching Law Students Through IndividualLearning Styles, 62 ALBANY LAW REVIEW 213-247 (1998). Professors shouldtailor their teaching methodologies to accommodate individual learning stylesof students. To bring this to light, the authors used the ProductivityEnvironmental Reference Survey (PERS) to analyze the individual learningstyles of seventy-six first-year law students in a legal research and writingclass. Part II describes the results of the testing and makes recommendations ofteaching strategies that complement the students’ learning styles. The diagnostictest used in the study, statistical results of the study, and examples of ahomework prescription are described in the Appendices.

Champagne, David W., Improving Your Teaching: How Do Students Learn?,83 LAW LIBRARY JOURNAL 85-90 (1991). Since everyone receives andprocesses information in different ways, teachers should adapt their teachingmethods to the different learning styles of their students. The author describesseveral different learning styles and suggests ways to help various types oflearners by choosing materials and methodologies that maximize learningopportunities for students with a variety of learning styles.

Hess, Gerald F., Listening to Our Students: Obstructing and EnhancingLearning in Law School, 31 UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO LAW REVIEW941-964 (1997). To optimize teaching and learning in the diverse classroom,Hess prescribes a two-step process: “(1) teachers should frequently ask lawstudents to assess the effectiveness of various teaching and learning methods;and (2) teachers and students should use that feedback to make appropriateadjustments.” (p. 963) Hess’ suggestions are supported by the literature onteaching and learning in higher education, and students’ observations andsuggestions about their law school experiences.


Jacobson, M.H. Sam, Using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator to AssessLearning Style: Type or Stereotype? 33 WILLAMETTE LAW REVIEW 261-313(1997). The author describes the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) test andevaluates its limitation in assessing law student learning types. Jacobsonproposes another test, the Learning Styles Questionnaire, that avoids thestereotyping and other problems associated with the MBTI.

Ray, Mary Barnard, How Individual Differences Affect Organization and HowTeachers Can Respond to These Differences, 5 LEGAL WRITING 125-142(1999). This paper presents a set of categories teachers can use to understandtheir students and adapt their teaching to help students solve organization,outlining, and legal reasoning problems.

Rogers, Nicolette, Improving the Quality of Learning in Law Schools byImproving Student Assessment, 4 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 113-140 (1993).The author reports on the results of a survey she conducted on the role ofassessment on learning tasks. She concludes assessment is an importantteaching and learning tool rather than a simple mechanism for assigning grades.She provides tips for designing assessment instruments that enhance learning.

LEGAL ANALYSIS

Batey, Robert, Parker v. Levy: A Primer in Judicial Persuasion, 49 JOURNALOF LEGAL EDUCATION 97-125 (1999). Batey believes beginning law studentsshould understand the rhetorical nature of legal writing and become intelligentconsumers of judicial opinions. He uses Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733 (1974)as a model for such analysis.

Passalacqua, Angela, Using Visual Techniques to Teach Legal Analysis andSynthesis, 3 LEGAL WRITING 203-216 (1997). Recognizing individual studentslearn differently, this short piece introduces the use of visual teachingtechniques to teach legal analysis and synthesis. Several examples areillustrated in the Appendices.

Spanbauer, Julie M., Teaching First-Semester Students That ObjectiveAnalysis Persuades, 5 LEGAL WRITING 167-189 (1999). Positing that law“[s]tudents frequently experience frustration and difficulty when they make thetransition from objective to persuasive analysis and writing,” (p. 167) theauthor offers two teaching techniques that can be used in the first semester toenhance learning on the persuasive nature, objective analysis, and writing. PartV describes the author’s close reading exercise, appropriate for first-semesterlegal writing courses.


Wade, John H., Meet MIRAT Legal Reasoning Fragmented Into LearnableChunks, 2 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 283-297 (1990-91). “To think likelawyers” can be taught, according to the author, by using his MIRAT system(M – Material facts, present or absent; I – Issues of law or policy; R – Rule orresources; A – Arguments (or application); and T – Tentative conclusion). Hedescribes each principle and gives examples.

LEGAL RESEARCH AND WRITING

Bannai, Lorraine, Anne Enquist, Judith Maier & Susan McClellan, SailingThrough Designing Memo Assignments, 5 LEGAL WRITING 193-224 (1999).Want to know the top ten mistakes in designing memo problems? Check outSection I of the article, outlining ten of the most frequent mistakes made.Section II describes the ideal assignment, followed by selective strategies forworking through the process of designing a memo. A complete memo exampleappears in Appendix 2.

Beazley, Mary Beth, The Self-Graded Draft: Teaching Students to ReviseUsing Guided Self-Critique, 3 LEGAL WRITING 175-201 (1997). The authorexplains her self-grading guidelines and discusses “various methods forincorporating the self-grading process into a legal writing course.” (p. 177)Appendices contain self-grading guidelines.

Boyle, Robin A. & Rita Dunn, Teaching Law Students Through IndividualLearning Styles, 62 ALBANY LAW REVIEW 213-247 (1998). (See Learning.)

Burke, Bari R., Legal Writing (Groups) at the University of Montana:Professional Voice Lessons in a Communal Context, 52 MONTANA LAWREVIEW 373-418 (1991). Among other things, this article briefly traces theevolution of and describes the writing program at the University of MontanaSchool of Law in the early 1990s, which was based on the Law School's “lawfirm” model. Under this scheme, each first year student is assigned to a lawfirm, “a group of six or seven students [associates] . . . guided by a speciallytrained upper-class student, the ‘junior partner.’” (p. 391) The faculty or“senior partners” design and monitor the firm activities. In the end, the authorwishes to convince us all of the virtues of small, collaborative group method oflearning over other teaching methods.

Calleros, Charles R., Reading, Writing, and Rhythm: A Whimsical, MusicalWay of Thinking About Teaching Legal Method and Writing, 5 LEGALWRITING 1-22 (1999). Calleros presents his unique ideas on teaching music in


the form of a play designed to provide insight to teachers of Legal Method andWriting.

Caplow, Stacy, From Courtroom to Classroom: Creating an AcademicComponent to Enhance the Skills and Values Learned in a Student JudicialClerkship Clinic, 75 NEBRASKA LAW REVIEW 872-915 (1996). (SeeExternships.)

Clinch, Peter, Practical Legal Research the Cardiff Way, 28 LAW TEACHER270-280 (1994). The Practical Legal Research course structure, content,timetable, materials used, and method of assessment are described. TheAppendices outline the course’s written standards, typical lesson plan, and legalresearch skills guide.

Cobley, Cathy & Stephen White, Specimen and Model Answers in LawTeaching, 28 LAW TEACHER 36-55 (1994). (See Criminal Law and Procedure.)

Cochran, Rebecca A., Legal Research and Writing Programs as Vehicles forLaw Student Pro Bono Service, 8 BOSTON UNIVERSITY PUBLIC INTEREST LAWJOURNAL 429-447 (1999). Cochran explains how pro bono service can beintegrated into a first-year Legal Research and Writing course by havingstudents research and write memos on legal issues presented by clients in aschool’s in-house clinic.

Crist, Maria Perez, Technology in the LRW Curriculum – High Tech, LowTech, or No Tech, 5 LEGAL WRITING 93-123 (1999). (See Audiovisual Aids.)

Dawson, T. Brettel, Legal Research in a Social Science Setting: The Problemof Method, 14 THE DALHOUSIE LAW JOURNAL 445-472 (1992). By way ofdescribing the design and development of his legal research methods course, theauthor briefly describes the contours of the class. The course was offered overa thirteen week semester, and was divided into three segments: (1) the researchsetting, (2) the research process, and (3) the research product. The Appendixcontains a set of guiding questions for the course.

Downie, Jocelyn, Michael Deturbide & Laura Fraser, A Computer-AssistedLegal Research and Writing Course, 21 DALHOUSIE LAW JOURNAL 429-439(1998). (See Computers.)

Enquist, Anne, Critiquing and Evaluating Law Students’ Writing: Advice fromThirty-Five Experts, 22 SEATTLE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 1119-1163(1999). The author records teaching tips from 35 experienced legal writing


teachers on topics such as critiquing students writing and providing appropriatefeedback.

Enquist, Anne, Critiquing Law Students’ Writing: What the Students Say IsEffective, 2 LEGAL WRITING 145-209 (1996). This article describes a studyinvolving four “representative” students and five legal writing faculty set up todetermine which types of instructor comments are most useful to students.Recognizing the obvious shortcomings of the study, Enquist is able to offerseven guidelines, which may be taken into consideration when critiquing studentwriting assignments.

Glannon, Joseph W., Terry Jean Seligmann, Medb Mahony Sichko & LindaSandstrom Simard, Coordinating Civil Procedure with Legal Research andWriting: A Field Experiment, 47 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 246-259(1997). (See Civil Procedure.)

Griffin, Lissa, Teaching Upperclass Writing: Everything You Always Wantedto Know But Were Afraid to Ask, 34 GONZAGA LAW REVIEW 45-79 (1998-99).The author makes a number of proposals to strengthen the upper-class writingrequirement, such as requiring students to purchase a text and using checkliststo suggestions to improve faculty involvement.

Harris, Debra & Susan D. Susman, Toward a More Perfect Union: UsingLawyering Pedagogy to Enhance Legal Writing Courses, 49 JOURNAL OFLEGAL EDUCATION 185-202 (1999). The authors describe their efforts toincorporate lawyering skills and methodologies into a standard legal researchcourse. They found not only do students produce more effective writing, butthey also grasp the important relationship between law and fact and are exposedto a variety of non-writing lawyering skills earlier in their law school careers.

Hasche, Annette, Teaching Writing in Law: A Model to Improve StudentLearning, 3 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 267-294 (1992). The authorconducted a study on whether teaching writing can promote deeper studentlearning in a substantive class. In addition to instruction in the LegalSystem-Torts class, students were instructed on the use of writing to stimulatereflection, analysis, evaluation and synthesis. Writing assignments wereintegrated into the class. This article describes the method used and the positiveoutcomes obtained from this experiment.

Johansen, Steven J., “What Were You Thinking?”: Using AnnotatedPortfolios to Improve Student Assessment, 4 LEGAL WRITING 123-147 (1998).Simply put, a portfolio is a collection of self-selected student papers, collected


toward the end of the class and used primarily as a tool for self-reflection. Theauthor makes a clear delineation between grading and assessment, explaininghow the latter, through the use of annotated portfolios, may be used as apowerful learning and teaching technique.

Kintzer, Gail Ann, Maureen Straub Kordesh & C. Ann Sheehan, Rule BasedLegal Writing Problems: A Pedagogical Approach, 3 LEGAL WRITING143-162 (1997). The authors advance the notion of using teaching techniquesbased on progressing from simple to complex writing rules in selecting anddesigning first-year law student assignments. They explain the pedagogyunderlying problem selection and design. Next, the authors’ progressive modelis outlined in detail, followed by illustrations of problems based on thisprogressive paradigm.

Kissam, Philip C., Seminar Papers, 40 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION339-349 (1990). “This essay suggests a theory of seminars and outlinesprocedures for implementing the theory through student-centered research andwriting projects.” (p. 340) The procedures are based on the author’sexperiences and experimentation at the University of Kansas Law School. Thepiece may provide a good starting point for the novice seminar teacher.

Magid, Laurie, Awarding Fair Grades in a Process-Oriented Legal Researchand Writing Course, 43 WAYNE LAW REVIEW 1657-1684 (1997). Can theLegal Research & Writing instructor be expected to grade fairly with theconsistent intervention during the various drafting stages of most legal researchand writing assignments? The author thinks this can be accomplished byrequiring a graded research report. The mechanics and procedure of theresearch report are reviewed in Section III of the article.

Mika, Karin, Essay: Innovative Teaching Methods and Practical Uses ofLiterature in Legal Education, 18 WHITTIER LAW REVIEW 815-822 (1997).Because the author believes the breadth of reading enhances student’s abilityto think and write, she decided to integrate literature into the first year LegalWriting course. Her intent was not to conduct a law and literature course, butto incorporate literature into the appellate advocacy exercises. She chose thenovel, Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov, and provided citations to various criticismsin the hope of providing better insight into the novel by her students. Theamount of perceived work required of students was a factor that almost killedthe project. It is not obvious whether the author would again conduct this“experiment.”

Miller, Douglas, Using Examinations in First-Year Legal Research, Writing,


and Reasoning Courses, 3 LEGAL WRITING 217-239 (1997). (See Evaluation.)

O’Neill, Kate, Adding an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Perspectiveto a Traditional Legal Writing Course, 50 FLORIDA LAW REVIEW 709-718(1998). (See Alternative Dispute Resolution/Mediation.)

Silecchia, Lucia Ann, Designing and Teaching Advanced Legal Research andWriting Courses, 33 DUQUESNE LAW REVIEW 203-248 (1995). After outliningwhy advanced research and writing courses should be offered and addressingsome of the practical considerations in establishing such a course, Silecchiaprovides a model for an integrated advanced legal research and writing course.

Silecchia, Lucia Ann, Legal Skills Training in the First Year of Law School:Research? Writing? Analysis? or More?, 100 DICKINSON LAW REVIEW245-290 (1996). The author surveyed U.S. law schools to determine the statusof first year research and writing programs. Her findings are included alongwith a discussion of a traditional legal research and writing program and anevaluation of its strengths and drawbacks. The article then explores thebroader-based skills covered, and the strengths and weaknesses of thisphilosophy of first year training. She then proposes a compromise plan thatattempts to incorporate the strengths of these approaches. The Appendicescontain a copy of the survey and summary of responses.

Silecchia, Lucia Ann, Of Painters, Sculptors, Quill Pens, and Microchips:Teaching Legal Writing in the Electronic Age, 75 NEBRASKA LAW REVIEW802-846 (1996). (See Computers.)

Staheli, Kory D., Motivating Law Students to Develop Competent LegalResearch Skills: Combating the Negative Findings of the Howland and LewisSurvey, 14:1/2 LEGAL REFERENCE SERVICES QUARTERLY 195-207 (1994).This short piece gives a few pointers on ways to motivate and teach lawstudents to develop competent legal research skills. This article is alsosummarized in 87 LAW LIBRARY JOURNAL 576 (1995).

Stanchi, Kathryn M., Resistance is Futile: How Legal Writing PedagogyContributes to the Law’s Marginalization of Outsider Voices, 103 DICKINSONLAW REVIEW 7-57 (1998). (See Diversity.)

Stevens, Richard W., To Teach Plain English Techniques, Use JuryInstructions, 2 THOMAS M. COOLEY JOURNAL OF PRACTICAL AND CLINICALLAW 177-191 (1998). Stevens shows how pattern jury instructions can be usedas writing exercises to teach students plain English techniques.


Tonner, Grace & Diana Pratt, Selecting and Designing Effective Legal WritingProblems, 3 LEGAL WRITING 163-173 (1997). If we assume the success of alegal writing course depends on the quality of the problems assigned, this shortpiece provides some guidance for designing legal writing problems. The articleoutlines: “(1) general considerations in problem design, (2) designing expositoryproblems, (3) designing persuasive problems, and (4) sources of problems.” (p.163)

LEGISLATION

Bell, Bernard W., “No Motor Vehicles in the Park”: Reviving the Hart-FullerDebate to Introduce Statutory Construction, 48 JOURNAL OF LEGALEDUCATION 88-100 (1998). Bell describes the use of a single hypothetical topreview many of the issues discussed in a typical legislation course.

Bell, Derrick, A Pre-Memorial Message on Law School Teaching, 23 NEWYORK UNIVERSITY REVIEW OF LAW & SOCIAL CHANGE 205-215 (1997). (SeeConstitutional Law. Teaching Methods.)

PROBLEM METHOD

Dawson, T. Brettel, Legal Research in a Social Science Setting: The Problemof Method, 14 DALHOUSIE LAW JOURNAL 445-472 (1992). (See LegalResearch and Writing.)

Macfarlane, Julie & John Manwaring, Using Problem-Based Learning toTeach First Year Contracts, 16 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGALEDUCATION 271-298 (1998). (See Contracts.)

Szabo, Anita B., Teaching Substantive Law Through Problem Based Learningin Hong Kong, 11 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGAL EDUCATION 195-210(1993). After briefly comparing the differences between problem-based learning(PBL) and problem solving, Szabo then proceeds to provide an overview of thecontents of the PBL program, the teaching method used, and a description of asample week. This is followed by a detailed analysis of teaching part of a coresubstantive Conveyancing course through PBL at the City Polytechnic of HongKong. She concludes with critical analysis of that method of teaching.

PROBLEM SOLVING

Johnson, Andrea L., Teaching Creative Problem Solving and AppliedReasoning Skills: A Modular Approach, 34 CALIFORNIA WESTERN LAW


REVIEW 389-395 (1998). Arguing that in today’s business environmenttraditional teaching methods such as lectures and case discussions areinadequate, the author proposes a modular approach that actively integratesskills training such as creative problem solving and applied reasoning intosubstantive and interdisciplinary courses. She notes that her essay can serve as“a guide for professors interested in integrating problem solving skills into theircurriculum.” (p. 389) The essay proceeds to: (1) discuss the pedagogy forcreative problem solving and illustrates the need for such skills; (2) explain thefundamentals of the modular approach as used in courses such asAdministrative Law, Corporations, Antitrust, and Telecommunication Law toteach these skills, and (3) outline the learning processes for creating problemsolving in transactional negotiations.

Kerper, Janeen, Creative Problem Solving vs. the Case Method: A MarvelousAdventure in which Winnie-the-Pooh Meets Mrs. Palsgraf, 34 CALIFORNIAWESTERN LAW REVIEW 351-374 (1998). This is basically a lengthy critique ofthe case method. Nevertheless, the author compares the case method with theproblem solving method by applying both methods to the facts of the 1924Palsgraf case.

Lerner, Alan M., Law & Lawyering in the Work Place: Building BetterLawyers by Teaching Students to Exercise Critical Judgment as CreativeProblem Solver, 32 AKRON LAW REVIEW 107-153 (1999). (See EmploymentLaw.)

Morton, Linda, Teaching Creative Problem Solving: A ParadigmaticApproach, 34 CALIFORNIA WESTERN LAW REVIEW 375-388 (1998). (SeeClinical Education.)

Moskovitz, Myron, Beyond the Case Method: It’s Time to Teach withProblems, 42 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 241-270 (1992). (See CriminalLaw and Procedure.)

Nathanson, Stephen, Creating Problems for Law Students: The Key toTeaching Legal Problem-Solving?, 10 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGALEDUCATION 1-21 (1992). Postulating that problem solving is a key componentof legal education, Nathanson outlines two general points about designing acurriculum for legal problem solving. The first part of the paper discusses basicprinciples and how they apply to the design of a problem-solving curriculum.The second point outlines selective techniques for designing problem-solvingexercises for the classroom.


Nathanson, Stephen, Designing Problems to Teach Legal Problem Solving, 34CALIFORNIA WESTERN LAW REVIEW 325-349 (1998). Nathanson outlines andexplains why the problem method is an important teaching technique and whatfeatures make them effective learning tools.

Nathanson, Stephen, Developing Legal Problem-Solving Skills, 44 JOURNALOF LEGAL EDUCATION 215-231 (1994). (See Corporations.)

O’Leary, Kimberly E., Using “Difference Analysis” to Teach Problem-Solving, 4 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 65-107 (1997). (See Clinical Education.)

Senger, Charles J., Thinking Aloud Protocols: A Diagnostic Tool for TeachingLegal Problem Solving, 10 THOMAS M. COOLEY LAW REVIEW 367-382(1993). Although legal educators generally do a good job of testing thestudents’ knowledge after the fact, the author contends more tools are neededto teach students the process of thinking and the monitoring of thinking.Accordingly, we can monitor student thinking itself, rather than just the ultimateproducts of that thinking, by using his “think aloud” method while students areactively engaged in problem solving. The balance of the article reviews howthinking aloud is done, with examples for its use in both informal and formalsettings. Finally, the article concludes with a discussion of specific ways inwhich the thinking aloud protocol methodology may be put to use in law schoolteaching.

Symposium, Conceiving the Lawyer as Creative Problem Solver, 34CALIFORNIA WESTERN LAW REVIEW 267-565 (1998). Of the 14 articles in thissymposium, four discuss the aspects of teaching problem solving in law school.

PROPERTY

Castan, Melissa & Jennifer Schultz, Teaching Native Title, 8 LEGALEDUCATION REVIEW 75-98 (1997). First examining teaching objectives for aNative Title course in Australia, this article also describes the methodologiesthat can be adopted in teaching large and small groups and outlines some of theteaching materials that may be used in the course.

Symposium, Casebook Review, 22 SEATTLE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 867-1055 (1999). (See Casebooks.)

Szabo, Anita B., Teaching Substantive Law Through Problem Based Learningin Hong Kong, 11 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGAL EDUCATION 195-210(1993). (See Problem Method.)


RACE

Ansley, Frances Lee, Race and the Core Curriculum in Legal Education, 79CALIFORNIA LAW REVIEW 1511-1597 (1991). The why’s and how’s ofintegrating race into the law school’s core curriculum are the main focus of thisessay. In the process, Ansley describes and illustrates examples of how raceperspectives have been incorporated into Property, Gratuitous Transfers, Raceand Gender in American Law, and Discrimination and the Law courses.

Bender, Leslie, Teaching Torts as if Gender Matters: Intentional Torts, 2VIRGINIA JOURNAL OF SOCIAL POLICY & THE LAW 115-163 (1994). (SeeGender. Torts.)

Greenberg, Judith G. & Robert V. Ward, Teaching Race and the Law ThroughNarrative, 30 WAKE FOREST LAW REVIEW 323-345 (1995). (See Gender.Storytelling.)

Gunning, Isabelle R., An Essay on Teaching Race Issues in the RequiredEvidence Course: More Lessons From the O.J. Simpson Case, 28SOUTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 355-365 (1999). (See Evidence.Gender.)

SIMULATION

Feinman, Jay M., Simulations: An Introduction, 45 JOURNAL OF LEGALEDUCATION 469-479 (1995). After briefly espousing the virtues of simulationteaching methods, Feinman proceeds to provide a nine step checklist of keyissues in developing simulations.

Liebman, Carol Bensinger, The Professional of Law: Columbia Law School’sUse of Experiential Learning Techniques to Teach ProfessionalResponsibility, 58–AUT Law & Contemporary Problems 73-86 (1995). (SeeEthics/Professional Responsibility.)

Lipton, Jacqueline D., Role-Playing Exercises in First Year Legal ProcessClasses, 16 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGAL EDUCATION 97-121 (1998).Believing simulations or role-playing techniques can greatly enhance otherteaching methods, Lipton describes the methodology and evaluation in each ofthe four exercises she has used at Monash University (Australia): (1)alternative dispute resolution, (2) negotiation and drafting, (3) clientinterviewing and use of interpreters, and (4) constitutional convention debate.The first two are further developed in the Appendix 1 and 2 respectively.


Lubet, Steven, Advocacy Education: The Case for Structural Knowledge, 66NOTRE DAME LAW REVIEW 721-737 (1991). The National Institute for TrialAdvocacy’s (NITA) teaching method is described, criticized, and modified toprovide a law school model for advocacy education. In the process, the authoroffers several simulations that can be incorporated into a trial advocacy course.

Lynch, Andrew, Why Do We Moot? Exploring the Role of Mooting in LegalEducation, 7 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 67-96 (1997). This paper describesthe historical roots of moots (moot court experiences), the current use of mootsat three Australian law schools, and the theoretical basis of moots as a learningand assessment tool. In the second part of the paper, the author examinesstudent experiences of moots collected from focus groups. Research suggestsmoots encourage students to immerse themselves in an area of substantive law,work closely with peers, and develop important practical skills.

Moliterno, James E., Legal Education, Experiential Education, andProfessional Responsibility, 38 WILLIAM & MARY LAW REVIEW 71-123(1996). After discussing the evolution of legal education, Moliterno proposesan intensive, four-semester, simulation-based, ethics program focusing on thedevelopment of legal skills. The “Program” would incorporate legal skills andethics, an externship, and simulation exercises in substantive elective courses.

Rosato, Jennifer L., All I Ever Needed to Know About Teaching Law SchoolI Learned Teaching Kindergarten: Introducing Gaming Techniques into theLaw School Classroom, 45 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 568-581 (1995).After outlining the benefits of gaming or simulated game playing, the authorprovides step-by-step instructions on creating one’s own game. Accordingly,the creation of a game requires a number of discrete steps: defining educationalobjectives, designing, preparing, playing, and modifying the game.

Strauss, Andrew L., Creating and Conducting In-Class Simulations in PublicInternational Law: A Producer’s Guide, 4 ILSA JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONALAND COMPARATIVE LAW 669-681 (1998). (See International Law.)

Vaughn, Robert G., Use of Simulations in a First-Year Civil Procedure Class,45 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 480-486 (1995). (See Civil Procedure.)

Weir, Michael, The Wytiga Negotiation – Native Title and Skills Training, 7LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 253-265 (1996). “This note discusses the WytigaNegotiation, a part of the integrated skills program in the LLB at BondUniversity School of Law [Australia].” (p. 253) The exercise focuses onprovisions of the Native Title Act (1993) (NTA) in the context of negotiations


between parties to an application for native title. The author “dicuss[es] theprocedures followed and the results obtained using a student survey.” (p. 253)Copies of the materials used are available from the author upon request.

Widdison, Robin, Michael Aikenhead & Tom Allen, Computer Simulation inLegal Education, 5 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LAW & INFORMATIONTECHNOLOGY 279-307 (1997). (See Contracts.)

Yin, George K., Simulating the Tax Legislative Process in the Classroom, 47JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 104-117 (1997). As part of a Tax Policyseminar, Yin assigns students roles as finance committee members,administration representatives, or lobbyists. The purpose of the simulation isto reach a revenue goal established by the professor. Students must negotiatetheir interests and attempt to influence the committee. This simulation showsthe necessity of cooperative negotiating when attempting to reach a specificoutcome.

SKILLS TRAINING

Aaronson, Mark Neal, We Ask You to Consider: Learning About PracticalJudgment in Lawyering, 4 CLINICAL LAW REVIEW 247-320 (1998). (SeeClinical Education.)

Buckley, Ross P., Incorporating Dispute Resolution and Drafting Skills Intoa Substantive Law Course, 16 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGAL EDUCATION261-269 (1998). (See Alternative Dispute Resolution/Mediation. Contracts.)

Craver, Charles B., The Impact of a Pass/Fail Option on Negotiation CoursePerformance, 48 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 176-186 (1998). (SeeEvaluations.)

Keyes, Mary E. & Michael J. Whincop, The Moot Reconceived: Some Theoryand Evidence on Legal Skills, 8 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 1-41 (1997). (SeeEvaluation.)

Leaver, Alan, Contexualising Law: An Attempt to Operationalise Theory byTeaching Interviewing in the Law School, 5 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW195-221 (1994). (See Criminal Law and Procedure.)

Lubet, Steven, Advocacy Education: The Case for Structural Knowledge, 66NOTRE DAME LAW REVIEW 721-737 (1991). (See Simulations.)


Moliterno, James E., Teaching Legal Ethics in a Program of ComprehensiveSkills Development, 15 JOURNAL OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION 145-170 (1990).(See Ethics/Professional Responsibility.)

Park, Robert, Appropriate Methods for the Teaching of Legal Skills inPractical Training Courses, 8 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL LEGAL EDUCATION161-189 (1990). According to the author, this paper explores the currentmethods used to teach legal skills. He also discusses models of teaching andinstructional design and their application to legal skills.

Schultz, Franklin M., Teaching “Lawyering” to First-Year Law Students: AnExperiment in Constructing Legal Competence, 52 WASHINGTON & LEE LAWREVIEW 1643-1665 (1995). The author describes the content of a first-yearlawyering course and relates the content to the perceived gap between the skillsand values taught in law school and those presumably needed in practice. Hesummarizes and applies the findings of an empirical study of lawyers inChicago and rural Missouri known as the Zemans-Rosenblum Survey.

Silecchia, Lucia Ann, Legal Skills Training in the First Year of Law School:Research? Writing? Analysis? or More?, 100 DICKINSON LAW REVIEW245-301 (1996). (See Legal Research and Writing.)

Sisk, Gregory C., Teaching Litigation with the Federal Government, 49JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 275-291 (1999). Sisk describes a coursedevoted to federal litigation issues. He includes information on courseobjectives and course content.

Sokolow, David Simon, From Kurosawa to (Duncan) Kennedy: The Lessonsof Rashomon for Current Legal Education, 1991 WISCONSIN LAW REVIEW969-987 (1991). (See Contracts.)

Stark, Jack, Teaching Statutory Law, 44 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION579-587 (1994). Knowing how to read and analyze statutory materials areessential lawyering skills. Stark develops and proposes a syllabus for teachingstatutory law. He discusses the rationale for the various components and theways in which these may be taught.

Venter, Christine Mary, Encouraging Personal Responsibility – AnAlternative Approach to Teaching Legal Ethics, 58 AUT LAW ANDCONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS 287-296 (1995). (See Ethics/ProfessionalResponsibility.)


Weir, Michael, The Wytiga Negotiation – Native Title and Skills Training, 7LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 253-265 (1996). (See Simulations.)

SMALL GROUPS

Burke, Bari R., Legal Writing (Groups) at the University of Montana:Professional Voice Lessons in a Communal Context, 52 MONTANA LAWREVIEW 373-418 (1991). (See Legal Research and Writing.)

Calmore, John O., Close Encounters of the Racial Kind: PedagogicalReflections and Seminar Conversations, 31 UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCOLAW REVIEW 903-926 (1997). (See Critical Legal Studies.)

Clemons, Linda Karen, Alternative Pedagogies for Minority Students, 16THURGOOD MARSHALL LAW REVIEW 635-639 (1991). (See Diversity.)

Kissam, Philip C., Seminar Papers, 40 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION339-349 (1990). (See Legal Research and Writing.)

Murdoch, Jim, Using Group Skills in Honours Teaching: The EuropeanHuman Rights Project, 28 LAW TEACHER 258-269 (1994). (See InternationalLaw. Teaching Methods.)

STORYTELLING

Davis, Dena S., Tell Me a Story: Using Short Fiction in Teaching Law andBioethics, 47 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 240-245 (1997). (See HealthLaw. Teaching Methods.)

Greenberg, Judith G. & Robert V. Ward, Teaching Race and the Law ThroughNarrative, 30 WAKE FOREST LAW REVIEW 323-345 (1995). (See Gender.Race.)

Harris, Angela P. & Marjorie M. Shultz, “A(nother) Critique of PureReason”: Toward Civic Virtue of Legal Education, 45 STANFORD LAWREVIEW 1773-1805 (1993). (See Critique.)

Scales-Trent, Judy, Using Literature in Law School: The Importance ofReading and Telling Stories, 7 BERKELEY WOMEN'S LAW JOURNAL 90-124(1992). (See Gender.)


TAXATION

Oberst, Michael A., Teaching Tax Law: Developing Analytical Skills, 46JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 79-93 (1996). Passive and active teachingmethodologies are discussed and contrasted. The latter approach is favoredbecause it requires students’ direct involvement with tax codes and regulations.Oberst describes some of his teaching methods and techniques, such as classpreparation, textbook use, classroom analysis, and exams. He believes taxteachers are duty bound to develop students’ skills in interpreting statutes andregulations, just as practicing tax attorneys must constantly analyze primarytax materials.

Taylor, Scott A., Computer and Internet Applications in a Clinical LawProgram at the University of New Mexico, 6 JOURNAL OF LAW &INFORMATION SCIENCE 35-48 (1995). The author describes a clinical lawprogram that makes extensive use of computers, expert systems software,online legal research, CD-ROM, e-mail, and the Internet to assist and helpprepare federal and state income tax forms for the working poor.

Yin, George K., Simulating the Tax Legislative Process in the Classroom, 47JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 104-117 (1997). (See Simulation.)

TEACHING METHODS

Bateman, Paul, Toward Diversity in Teaching Methods in Law Schools: FiveSuggestions from the Back Row, 17 QLR 397-427 (1997). Using diverseteaching methods affords opportunities for different student voices to be heard.It also strengthens understanding of the material and affords different ways tocommunicate particular kinds of information and skills. The author describesthe use of Socratic method, debriefing class participation, writing assignmentsthroughout the semester, games in and out of the classroom, the student learningcontract, and computer-aided instruction.

Bell, Derrick, A Pre-Memorial Message on Law School Teaching, 23 NEWYORK UNIVERSITY REVIEW OF LAW AND SOCIAL CHANGE 205-215 (1997).(See Constitutional Law. Legislation.)

Biggs, JB, Teaching for Better Learning, 2 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW133-147 (1990-91). This article describes several conceptions of learning andteaching. The author sees the classroom as an ecosystem in which three maincomponents, “presage, process and product,” (p. 136) affect the quality oflearning for individuals within the classroom. He then discusses approaches to


learning and focuses on the role of motivation and perception in the teachingcontext.

Butler, Des & Leanne Wiseman, Viva the Viva: Oral Examinations inContract Law, 4 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 331-351 (1993). (See Contracts.)

Castan, Melissa & Jennifer Schultz, Teaching Native Title, 8 LEGALEDUCATION REVIEW 75-98 (1997). (See Property.)

Davis, Dena S., Tell Me a Story: Using Short Fiction in Teaching Law andBioethics, 47 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 240-245 (1997). (See HealthLaw. Storytelling.)

Dessem, R. Lawrence, All We Really Need to Know About Teaching WeLearned in Kindergarten, 62 TENNESSEE LAW REVIEW 1073-1078 (1995).Dessem briefly describes basic teaching tips and techniques that may be usefulto the novice teacher.

Eagar, James, The Right Tool for the Job: The Effective Use of PedagogicalMethods in Legal Education, 32 GONZAGA LAW REVIEW 389-416 (1997).Although this piece does not describe teaching methods for a particular course,it does give brief overviews of the most common legal pedagogical teachingmethods: case method, problem method, simulation and role play, the use oftextbooks and lectures, and the supplementary aids of audio-visual and CAI.The author notes teaching methods selected for a course should depend on theobjective of the course and the types of materials to be used.

Friedland, Steven I., How We Teach: A Survey of Teaching Techniques inAmerican Law Schools, 20 SEATTLE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 1-44 (1996).The author surveyed U.S. law teachers and reports his findings. The survey’sbasic premise was to find out how law professors really teach in class. Theclassroom teacher might appreciate the section on “Using New [Teaching]Techniques” (p. 32) and “Sharing Teaching Insights.” (p.33)

Hess, Gerald F., Student Involvement in Improving Law Teaching andLearning, 67 UMKC LAW REVIEW 343-366 (1998). Hess advocates usingstudent advisory teams to improve the quality of teaching and learning in lawschool classes. The article describes development of the Student AdvisoryTeam’s (SATs) concept, reports data demonstrating the benefits of using SATs,and presents practical suggestions for implementing a SAT program.

Hess, Gerald F., The Legal Educator’s Guide to Periodicals on Teaching and


Learning, 67 UMKC LAW REVIEW 367-386 (1998). This article annotates 21journals and newsletters that focus on teaching and learning topics. The authordescribes each periodical, then summarizes two recent articles to illustrate thecontent of each type of periodical.

Jacobson, M.H. Sam, Using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator to AssessLearning Style: Type or Stereotypes?, 33 WILLAMETTE LAW REVIEW 261-313(1997). (See Learning.)

Laster, Kathy, Note, Design-a-Court: An Introductory Socio-LegalAssessment Exercise, 9 LEGAL EDUCATION REVIEW 193-212 (1998). Thisarticle describes an assignment given in a first-semester introductory courseentitled “Law and Society.” Fifty percent of a student’s grade is based on aproject that asks students to review literature, empirically test the ideas in theliterature, and apply insights to create their own model court.

Lustbader, Paula, Teach in Context: Responding to Diverse Student VoicesHelps All Students Learn, 48 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 402-416 (1998).This article discusses learning theory and specific techniques for increasingcontextualized learning. The author shows how context building can beintegrated into courses by experiential learning exercises, writing exercises, andcollaborative learning exercises.

MacFarlane, Peter J.M. & Gordon Joughin, An Integrated Approach toTeaching and Learning Law: The Use of Student Peer Mentor Groups toImprove the Quality of Student Learning in Contracts, 5 LEGAL EDUCATIONREVIEW 153-172 (1994). (See Contracts.)

Maurer, Nancy M. & Linda Fitts Mischler, Introduction to Lawyering:Teaching First-Year Students to Think Like Professionals, 44 JOURNAL OFLEGAL EDUCATION 96-115 (1994). This article describes the philosophy, goals,and methodologies of a first-year course at Albany Law School. The course,Introduction to Lawyering, is based on a partnership between the Clinical LegalStudies and Legal Research and Writing faculty. The authors believe thisintegrated program enhances skills and gives students a broad context tounderstand and practice essential skills and values.

Moliterno, James E., Legal Education, Experiential Education, andProfessional Responsibility, 38 WILLIAM & MARY LAW REVIEW 71-123(1996). (See Simulation.)

Murdoch, Jim, Using Group Skills in Honours Teaching: The European


Human Rights Project, 28 LAW TEACHER 258-269 (1994). (See InternationalLaw. Small Groups.)

Ordover, Abraham P., Teaching Sensitivity to Facts, 66 NOTRE DAME LAWREVIEW 813-823 (1991). Ordover believes fact-gathering, analysis, and use areimportant skills for practicing attorneys but ones that are often ignored in lawschools. He argues that systematic instruction in fact-finding and analysisshould be a required part of law school curriculum and suggests ways that thiscould be integrated into courses like Legal Research and Advocacy courses.

Orts, Eric W., Quality Circles in Law Teaching, 47 JOURNAL OF LEGALEDUCATION 425-431 (1997). This article describes quality circles in lawteaching and shows how they can be used to improve communication betweenfaculty and students during a course.

Randall, Vernellia R., The Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator, First Year LawStudents and Performance, 26 CUMBERLAND LAW REVIEW 63-103 (1995-96).The author explores the connection between learning styles and success in lawschool. She believes the Myers-Briggs type indicator test could be used to helpstudents understand how they learn best and help teachers understand how tomaximize success for students with different learning styles. The articleincludes several helpful charts explaining and characterizing different learningstyles.

Robertson, Heidi Gorovitz, Methods for Teaching Environmental Law: SomeThoughts on Providing Access to the Environmental Law System, 23COLUMBIA JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 237-297 (1998). (SeeEnvironmental Law.)

Rogers, John M., Class Participation: Random Calling and AnonymousGrading, 47 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 73-82 (1997). Rogers defends thepractice of forced recitation in class and taking class participation into accountin determining final grades.

Slomanson, William R., Electronic Lawyering and the Academy, 48 JOURNALOF LEGAL EDUCATION 216-228 (1998). The author describes his experience inadding an electronic component to his classes. He discusses home pages, e-mail,and world wide web access issues confronting teachers who use this technology.

Smith, Kevin H., “X-File” Law School Pedagogy: Keeping the Truth OutThere, 30 LOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW JOURNAL 27-85 (1998).


Smith presents his tongue-in-cheek advice to beginning law teachers oneverything from choosing a textbook to writing an exam.

Syverund, Kent D., Taking Students Seriously: A Guide for New LawTeachers, 43 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 247-259 (1993). Arguably themost salient section of this essay is the one describing suggestions for creatingthe right classroom environment for teaching and learning. It also covers advicefor out of class contact with students, among other subjects.

Thiemann, Sarah E., Beyond Guinier: A Critique of Legal Pedagogy, 24 NEWYORK UNIVERSITY REVIEW OF LAW & SOCIAL CHANGE 17-41 (1998). (SeeGender.)

Yen, Alfred C., The Art and Craft of Teaching: Art Resting on Craft, 10 ST.LOUIS UNIVERSITY PUBLIC LAW REVIEW 241-245 (1991). (See Evidence.)

TORTS

Bender, Leslie, Teaching Torts As If Gender Matters: Intentional Torts, 2VIRGINIA JOURNAL OF SOCIAL POLICY & THE LAW 115-163 (1994). (SeeGender. Race.)

Symposium, Five Approaches to Legal Reasoning in the Classroom:Contrasting Perspectives on O’Brien v. Cunard S.S. Co. Ltd., 57 MISSOURILAW REVIEW 346-499 (1992). The five articles comprising this symposium arewritten by five different authors representing pedagogical approaches toO’Brien v. Cunard S.S. Co. Ltd., a tort case typically taught in first-year torts.The papers included are: (1) Jay M. Feinman (The Ideology of LegalReasoning in the Classroom, pp. 363-69) explains the case as a critical legaltheorist, (2) Ann C. Shalleck (Feminist Legal Theory and the Reading ofO’Brien v. Cunard, pp. 371-397) explains how she would teach O’Brien froma feminist perspective, (3) Robert H. Lande (A Law & Economics Perspectiveon a “Traditional” Torts Case: Insights for Classroom and Courtroom, pp.399-441) uses law and economics to analyze the case, (4) Taunya LovellBanks (Teaching Laws With Flaws: Adopting A Pluralistic Approach toTorts, pp. 443-54, and (5) Richard W. Bourne (A “Traditionalist’s” Approachto Teaching O’Brien and to Ideology in the Classroom, pp. 455-67) articulateshow a “Traditionalist” would approach the task of teaching O’Brien. Inaddition to the articles, reprints to the text of the case and brief are included.


WILLS AND TRUSTS

Myers, Eleanor W., Teaching Good and Teaching Well: Integrating Valueswith Theory and Practice, 47 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 401-424 (1997).(See Ethics/Professional Responsibility.)


INDEX OF AUTHORS’ NAMES

Aaronson, Mark Neal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12, 47Ackerman, Robert M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5, 8Aiken, Jane Harris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12Aikenhead, Michael . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19, 47Alegre, Marcela Huaita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31Alexander, Peter C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5, 8Allen, Tom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19, 47Alschuler, Albert W. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Ansley, Frances Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45Astor, Hilary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Baker, Brook K. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12Ball, Wendy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Bannai, Lorraine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Barnes, Jeffrey W. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Bateman, Paul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50Batey, Robert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Beazley, Mary Beth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Bell, Derrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 42, 50Bell, Bernard W. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42Bender, Leslie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31, 45, 54Bennett, Walter H., Jr. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Biggs, J.B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50Bisom-Rapp, Susan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23, 31Bond, Carl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35Boyle, Robin A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35, 37Brustin, Stacy L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13, 27Buckley, Ross P. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5, 17, 47Burke, Bari R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37, 49Burns, Susan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Burton, Amon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Butler, Des . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 51Calleros, Charles R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 37Calmore, John O. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21, 49Calver, Richard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Campbell, Beth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Caplow, Stacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 38Cartwright, Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Casey, Jackie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31, 35Castan, Melissa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44, 51Champagne, David W. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35


Chavkin, David F. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13, 27Chinkin, Christine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Chinkin, C.M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Clemons, Linda Karen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 49Clinch, Peter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Cobley, Cathy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20, 38Cochran, Rebecca A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Cooke, Tony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 16Corcos, Christine A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Coss, Graeme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Cottrol, Robert J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Craver, Charles B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27, 47Crist, Maria Perez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 38Dark, Okianer Christian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Davis, Peggy Cooper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Davis, Dena S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33, 49, 51Dawson, T. Brettel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38, 42Dessem, Lawrence R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51Deturbide, Michael . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15, 38Donnellon, Anne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 30Downie, Jocelyn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15, 38Dunn, Rita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35, 37Duns, John . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 19Durchslag, Melvyn R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Dyer, Bruce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 19Dzienkowski, John S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Eagar, James . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51Eisele, Thomas D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Enquist, Anne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37, 38Eyster, Mary Jo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Feinman, Jay M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45Fejfar, Anthony J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Frase, Richard S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Friedland, Steven I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51Fraser, Laura . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15, 38Geist, Michael A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Giles, Marianne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Gillers, Stephen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 25Glannon, Joseph W. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12, 39Goh, Bee Chen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Gordon, Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Grano, Joseph D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 17


Green, Bruce A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Greenberg, Judith G. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32, 45, 49Griffin, Lissa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Grosberg, Lawrence M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13, 28Gunning, Isabelle R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28, 32, 45Harris, Debra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Harris, Angela P. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21, 49Hartwell, Steven . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13, 25Hasche, Annette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Hawkins-Leon, Cynthia G. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Hess, Gerald F. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35, 51Hing, Bill Ong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Hogan, Kevin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 16Hughson, Mary-Anne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 19Israel, Mark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Jacobson, M.H. Sam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36, 52Johansen, Steven J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Johnson, Andrea L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42Jones, Catherine J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33Joughin, Gordon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 52Katz, Harriet N. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Keating, Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Kelly, Michael J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 23Kerper, Janeen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43Keyes, Mary E. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28, 47King, Philip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Kintzer, Gail Ann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Kissam, Philip C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34, 40, 49Kordesh, Maureen Straub . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Kovach, Kimberlee K. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 13Kowalski, Andrzej . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Kutulakis, Peter N. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5, 8Lande, Robert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54Landry, Elaine M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 30Laster, Kathy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52Lawrence, Williams H. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 15Le Brun, Marlene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35Leaver, Alan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21, 47Lerner, Alan M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23, 43Levine, Samuel J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33Levinson, Sanford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 24Liebman, Carol Bensinger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25, 45


Lipton, Jacqueline D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45Lubet, Steven . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46, 47Lustbader, Paula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52Lynch, Andrew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46Macfarlane, Julie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 42MacFarlane, Peter J.M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 52Mack, Kathy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Mackinnon, Jacquelin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Magid, Laurie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Maharg, Paul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Maier, Judith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Manwaring, John . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 42Maurer, Nancy M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52McClellan, Susan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Migdal, Stephen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Mika, Karin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Miller, Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28, 40Mischler, Linda Fitts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52Moliterno, James E. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25, 46, 48, 52Morriss, Andrew P. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Morton, Linda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14, 43Moskovitz, Myron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21, 43Mossman, Mary Jane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 32Muller, Eric L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Murdoch, Jim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33, 49, 52Myers, Eleanor W. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26, 55Nathanson, Stephen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19, 43O’Leary, Kimberly E. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14, 44O’Neill, Kate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 41Oberst, Michael A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50Ogilvy, J.P. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Olson, Karin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31, 35Ordover, Abraham P. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Orford, Anne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 34Orland, Leonard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Orts, Eric W. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Otto, Dianne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 34Park, Robert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48Passalacqua, Angela . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Pratt, Diana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42Quigley, Fran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Randall, Vernellia R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53


Rawson, Shirley L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Ray, Mary Barnard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Reekie, Roy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Reitz, John C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34Reynolds, Glenn Harlan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Rhode, Deborah L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26Richman, William M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 17Ricketson, Sam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 19Ries, Jennifer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33Robertson, Heidi Gorovitz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23, 53Rogers, Nicolette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Rogers, John M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Rosato, Jennifer L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 32, 46Rule, Ella . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Sadler, Will . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Sandurska, Romana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Scales-Trent, Judy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32, 49Schultz, Jennifer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44, 51Schultz, Franklin M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48Seligmann, Terry Jean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12, 39Senger, Charles J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44Seuffert, Nan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 34Shalleck, Ann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15, 30, 31Shapiro, Stephen J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Sharman, Frank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 16Sheehan, C. Ann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Shultz, Marjorie M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21, 49Sichko, Medb Mahony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12, 39Silecchia, Lucia Ann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16, 41, 48Silver, Charles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Simard, Linda Sandstrom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12, 39Sisk, Gregory C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48Slomanson, William R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Smith, Kevin H. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Sokolow, David Simon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 48Sowle, Stephen D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Spanbauer, Julie M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Spegel, Nadja . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Spiliopoulos, Elaine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33Staheli, Kory D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41Stanchi, Kathryn M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 41Stark, Jack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48


Steinglass, Elizabeth Ehrenfest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Stevens, Richard W. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41Strauss, Andrew L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34, 46Subrin, Stephen N. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Susman, Susan D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Syverund, Kent D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54Szabo, Anita B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42, 44Taylor, Scott A, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50Thiemann, Sarah E. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32, 54Tonner, Grace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42Torrey, Morrison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31, 33, 35Turner, Dennis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26Tyree, Alan L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Tzannes, Maria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Vaughn, Robert G. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12, 46Venter, Christine Mary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27, 48Volokh, Eugene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Wade, John H. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Wagner, Wendy E. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Ward, Robert V. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32, 45, 49Warner, Richard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Weaver, Russell L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Weinstein, Janet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7, 15Weir, Michael . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46, 49Whincop, Michael J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28, 47White, Stephen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20, 38Widdison, Robin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19, 47Wirth, David A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24, 34Wiseman, Leanne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 51Yen, Alfred C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 54Yin, George K. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47, 50Young, Max . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

an annotated bibliography of current methods for law teaching

Documents